Novak was crap in sets 1 and 4. Accept it and move on. Roddick of 04 and 09 Wimbledon's was as tough an opponent as Novak that day easily. Why do 2 poor sets get cancelled out by 2 excellent ones? Hewitt, Agassi and Murray have also played better than Djokovic of 2010.
Don't switch stations. We were talking about HC finals, not Wimbledon. Definitely Roddick in 04 and 09 were tough no doubt. But that's on grass.
Novak was only crap in set 4 because of the disappointment of not getting the third. His concentration was thrown right off because of Nadal's ability to play clutch tennis.
Hewitt played **** in USO04. Ok Fed was in God mode that day but 2 bagel sets in a major final is ridiculous to suggest Hewitt was tough opponent that day.
Agassi in 05 final was def not better than Novak in USO2010 final. No way lol, Fed wasn't playing well in that 05 final either which is why Andre had his chances.
Roddick sucked big time against Fed at AO.
Murray in the AO2010 final was no where near better than Novak in 2010 USO final.
These are all obvious observations and only the die hard Fed fans will dispute this.
You say that Nadal 08 was more successful than 2010 because of quality of major wins rather than quantity.
Well Nadal's 13 majors have all been pathways against at least one of the big 4 apart from RG2010 where he had arguably his toughest possible opponent in the final anyway, afterall Sod was the only guy to have ever beat him there.
Fed's pathways were easier from the 04-07 time frame. Look at all his draws and tell me if you replace Fed with a 4 year older Rafa and put him in that time frame he wouldn't win the same amount of majors if not more.
22 year old Rafa (Fed's 04 age and with his draws) and 17 year old Fed assuming Rafa remains injury free:
(correlating to 2008 form: 2004)
AO04 - Win: he'd have some trouble with Nalbandian but would eventually beat him. The rest he would beat comfortably.
RG04 - Win: No need to discuss the draw
WIM04 - Win: in WIM08 form Rafa would win it.
USO04 - Win: Old Agassi wouldn't trouble peak Nadal too much. Hewitt would be a walk over for him.
(correlating to 2009 form and assuming no injury: 2005)
AO05 - Win: Safin would be very tough, but 05 correlates to Nadal's AO09 form where he faced and beat an even tougher opponent in Verdasco.
RG05 - Win
WIM05 - Win: Nothing tough here at all
USO05 - Win: Same as above
(correlating to 2010 form: 2006)
AO06 - Win: Joke draw and no, Davydenko is not going to beat Rafa in a major
RG06 - Win
WIM06 - Win
USO06 - Win
(correlating to 2011 form: 2007)
AO07 - Win
RG07 - Win
WIM07 - Win
USO07 - Win
That's 4 calendar slams in a row and 16majors. Sounds ridiculous right? Let me explain:
2006 was worse than 2010 in terms of the form of the top players. Given how easy some of the 06 draws were for Fed due to this reason, Nadal would most likely get the grand slam that year.
2007 correlates to 2011 where only Novak of 2011 form was able to stop him. Well, he didn't exist in 07 and Fed only 21 still not a chance of stopping Nadal.
2005 correlates to his 09 form. The Safin debate will be the one that every Fed fans says nobody beats Safin that day if peak Fed couldnt' do it. Well you're wrong. I alreadty typed up an explanation highlighting that Verdasco was playing at an even higher level than Safin in AO05. Nadal got through him so based on that, I'll assume he gets through Safin as well. Now, assuming he doesn't get injured and no Sod to take him out at RG that will be his. WIM05 Roddick was in rubbish form compared to the previous year. nadal would take that as well and there is no way he'd lose to 35 year old Agassi at USO.
2004 correlates to his 08 season. Nalbandian would be a tough match for him at AO but I still think he would overcome him. The rest of the majors he would win.
Now that's assuming everything goes right for him, no injuries. The reality is, injuries have stopped Nadal a lot so assuming he goes injury free for those 4 years isn't realistic. That may cost him a few of those majors. But with no Fed and Novak in the way, Nadal's toughest possible matches would be WIM04 against Roddick and AO05 against Safin. The rest he would win, some of them not comfortably but none of them would be tougher than those 2.
Nope Federer never beat Nadal at RG, but he's beaten him at Wimbledon and beaten Djokovic/Murray all on their best surfaces.
But he hasn't beat Nadal on Nadal's best surface in a major. That is a significant fact. Nadal HAS beat Federer in both grass and HC major finals.
Everyone makes the surface GOAT argument regarding Nadal at RG and try and excuse Fed for his losses because it's supposed to be normal to lose to a surface GOAT. Tell me, isn't Fed supposed to be the grass GOAT? and the HC GOAT? Nadal still beat him.
