Who had tougher competition - Federer from 2004-2008 or Nadal from 2008-2013

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
We all know that Federer was #1 for 237 consecutive weeks from 2/2/04 to 8/17/08 before his losing his place to Nadal.

I think many, including myself, expected Nadal to dominate the sport like Federer had.

In the 237 weeks that followed from Nadal first reaching #1, 8/18/08 to 3/4/13. Nadal was #1 for 102 total weeks.

Do you think Nadal had tougher competition during that time? Or why wasn't he able to be #1 for longer?
 

wy2sl0

Hall of Fame
Top 4 was stronger 08-13. Overall field strength arguably higher 04-08. Haters won't agree but it really is the truth. Specialists on every surface that when on could beat the top guys. Davy, Nalbandian, Roddick, Gonzalez, Blake, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero early on, then the Top 4 starting to come on strong 07-08.
 
Last edited:

KillerServe

Banned
Top4 are stronger from 07 and on, but overall field strength was much higher from 03-07. Mainly the top 4 getting to all slam semis now is proof of that.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Past prime Federer was able to reach #1 in 2012, that should give you a hint. It would be like Sampras reaching #1 in 2002. Had that happened, Hewitt era was weak.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Both fields are relatively equal outside the big 4 (Federer,Nadal,Djokovic, Murray)

But the top 4 today is much much stronger. Probably the strongest top 4 of all time
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Past prime Federer was able to reach #1 in 2012, that should give you a hint. It would be like Sampras reaching #1 in 2002. Had that happened, Hewitt era was weak.

Have you ever argued a single thing in Nadal's case? :lol: Federer is the one and only answer to everything.
 
Past prime Federer was able to reach #1 in 2012, that should give you a hint. It would be like Sampras reaching #1 in 2002. Had that happened, Hewitt era was weak.

Federer was able to reach no. 1 in 2012, because he is Federer. no justification needed.
 
Top