Will Nadal surpass Federer?

[nadal_slam_king]

LOL ! nadal is a whiner - about his injuries, about the schedule ...don't make me bring out all the list of excuses and complaints he's raised over the years

you were pwned - accept it ! the injury occurred during the USO



ha ha ha ha ha, I LOL'ed , matchupwise fast HC, delpo will always be favoured over rafa .... though inferior in movement, delpo has a better serve than djoker and more powerful strokes

rafa was dominating a pre-prime delpo, he lost thrice to him last year, including @ miami , before all his injuries ...

rafa didn't have that extra 5mph on serve last year ; abdominal tear or not , he wouldn't have won vs delpo

we'll see what happens in the future - we don't know yet how well delpo has recovered from his wrist injury

Didn't I just prove that bolded part false ???? coming from rafa's own mouth ?? How much more do you need to be pawned ????? seriously ???

At US Open:
Rafa in 2009 was 107mph average first serve, 84mph average 2nd serve.
Rafa in 2010 was 121mph average first serve, 88mph average 2nd serve.

The difference wasn't just in terms of speed, it was a directional difference. If it wasn't the US Open, Rafa wouldn't have played with a 5cm abdominal muscle strain, which did occur in Montreal.

http://www.gototennisblog.com/2009/09/14/rafael-nadal-injury-report-the-abdominal-kill-me-no/

I am very happy how I came back, but, now I had the first problem of the abdominal in Montreal after the match of Petzschner second round. I must gonna explain because I say during the week I prefer to didn’t speak about the injury during the week because I am in tournament right now.

I can say after Montreal I was doing a test. I did a test in Montreal, and the doctor didn’t see a lot, but the pain is still there. Cincinnati, the pain increase a little bit more. After the semifinals against Djokovic, I went to do an MRI, and I had some edema, strained muscle, and I think during these two weeks the strain is converted into a little bit of rupture, no? A little bit break.

Yeah, was tough to play few matches like this. But at the same time, was important for maybe play this tournament, try my best. It’s one of the most important tournaments of the year, and I had to try, no?

I start to playing well, but when I played against the wind, I can’t serve a little bit faster, no, and I can’t change a lot of directions.

But when I was serving to the middle in the advantage, and I can say I really can’t serve outside in the deuce, no? I only can serve in the middle, because if I serve it outside, the abdominal kill me, no?

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/usopen09/columns/story?columnist=garber_greg&id=4470406

Nadal, who had failed to defend his French Open and Wimbledon titles earlier this year because of tendinitis in his knees, was suffering from an abdominal muscle tear that affected all parts of his game, particularly the serve. But the way del Potro was playing -- his forehand was so unhittable, like a pea coming from a slingshot, that it was hard to see -- Nadal might not have had a chance if he was completely healthy.

The word del Potro used to describe his game was "unbelievable."

It was powerfully reminiscent of the surprising ascendance of another 20-year-old here, Russian Marat Safin, who torched then-four-time champion Pete Sampras in the 2000 final. For the record, Sampras won 10 games.

Think this was a surprise? The Argentine has beaten Nadal three straight times since March and taken six straight sets.

When Rafa was asked about the role his abdominal injury played in the loss, he grimaced.

"[I'm] going to repeat: He played much better than me, and for that reason he beat me," he said. "Later, it sounds like an excuse, no?"

Nadal detailed his injury for the first time, saying he sustained a muscle strain on the right side in Montreal that evolved into a tear in Cincinnati.

"Was tough to play [a] few matches like this," he said. "But at same time … it's one of the most important tournaments of the year, and I had to try."

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...uan_martin_del_potro_in_semis_of_us_open.html

"I think this is the best moment of my life," del Potro said.

Nadal was dealing with a strained abdominal muscle, and after the match he finally admitted the obvious - that it was bothering him.

The six-time Grand Slam tournament champion also gave plenty of credit to del Potro, who deserved every bit of it after sapping all the life, and hope, out of a player whose relentlessness is one of his biggest attributes.

"I'm going to repeat: He played much better than me, and for that reason he beat me," Nadal said.

Class.

 

[namelessone]

The abdominal tear was something that happened *during the USO* - that is what these interviews tell clearly ... I didn't hear anything about an abdominal tear during montreal ...

The tear did happen in USO I think but Nadal did have ab strain(according to people in the tennis world) in Cincinatti.

Nadal went from this(Cincy):

to this(USO 4R):

and then to this(USO QF):

Also, a nice bit about injuries in a interview from elmundo before the USO 09' SF(it's translated from spanish, with the usual oddities of google translation):

http://www.elmundo.es/elmundodeporte/2009/09/13/tenis/1252826190.html

"How do you feel: mind, body and limbs?

The mind, better than ever, with maximum illusion [sic] after being off for a time. Physically, well. Apart from the abdominal, the knees have not been a problem since I’ve been back. And that is always important when one is coming from an injury like the one I’ve had. It gives you confidence. All the work done has been productive.

What are you wearing to protect your abdomen?

I’m wearing a cummerbund, but well… I have what I have. I rather not talk about injuries in the middle of a tournament. When I finish I’ll say what I have and the reasons for not going to the Davis Cup, much to my regret.

Why don’t you want to talk about it?

When you talk about it you think more about the injuries than about playing. Everyone have problems, and it seems mine are named too much. Sometimes you are playing and are afraid of asking for the trainer. If I’m going to play the next day with options of winning, I don’t want everybody knowing something is wrong with my abs. I understand your job, but you must understand mine, which is to be my possible best every day. It’s not positive that the next day the headlines say I have an abdominal tear.

Gonzalez and Monfils have almost put in doubt your injury.

It’s a normal reaction when you lose and you’re being told the other one is injured. I don’t want to say if I’m alright or not for that reason too, because is not nice for the rival. I’ve been two months out of competition, two months waiting at home and I’m back playing two Masters Series, not on clay at Bastad. My body is not ready to compete with the best 50 in the world. I’ve had this muscle overload that probably has become a tear. When you are playing at the US Open, naturally it’s not going to get smaller. If I feel I can try and compete the next day, I don’t want to talk about it. Today I felt better, but the other day with Gonzalez, before the suspension, I felt bad, serving at 96 miles. But sport is overcoming, not only playing when at your best, but to do what you can even knowing you are not going to win. It’s overcoming yourself, not only the rival."

 

[Trillus]

What? That's so not true, Nadal could hardly pass Soderling in 2007. Did you see what he did to him this year? And Soderling is a better player now than he was then. + Rafa got injured during the 2007 final. Don't get me wrong, he was still playing quite well (and some remarkable shots) but "formidable" no. The first year when Rafa played formidable on grass was 2008. (First year he did well at Queen's too).

Nadal should have beat Soderling in straight sets in 2007. He blew a match point in the 3rd and then all the rain delays, which is how it eventually became a marathon it never should have been. This year he got blown away in the 1st set by Soderling in a way he never was in any set in the 07 match, and was able to dig deep enough to turn the tide.

 

[veroniquem]

And once he turned the tide, he rolled over Sod, something he couldn't have done in 2007 even though as I said he wasn't playing terribly (far from it) but he was not at his peak on grass for sure.

 

[abmk]

What? That's so not true, Nadal could hardly pass Soderling in 2007. Did you see what he did to him this year? And Soderling is a better player now than he was then. + Rafa got injured during the 2007 final. Don't get me wrong, he was still playing quite well (and some remarkable shots) but "formidable" no. The first year when Rafa played formidable on grass was 2008. (First year he did well at Queen's too).

I suppose you forgot nadal went 5 sets with both haase and petzschener this year, both far worse players than soderling ......:roll:

he lost 5 sets at both wimby 2007 and wimby 2010 before the finals ...

The 2007 final was as good a match as he's ever played on grass

 

[abmk]

And once he turned the tide, he rolled over Sod, something he couldn't have done in 2007 even though as I said he wasn't playing terribly (far from it) but he was not at his peak on grass for sure.

he didn't need to turn the tide when he was up 2 sets to love, did he ? LOL !

 

[veroniquem]

He played much better in 2008. As I said, just look at Queen's, 2008 is the first time he played well there.

 

[veroniquem]

he didn't need to turn the tide when he was up 2 sets to love, did he ? LOL !

I didn't say he couldn't turn the tide, I said he couldn't roll over Sod the way he could this year.

 

[veroniquem]

I suppose you forgot nadal went 5 sets with both haase and petzschener this year, both far worse players than soderling ......:roll:

That's completely different. Early rounds, hard to get in the rhythm, he had that kind of problem vs Kendrick as well in previous years.
Borg used to say the hardest thing at Wimbledon was to get to the second week.

 

[abmk]

namelessone,

ok !

nadal_slam_king,

but the injury turned "serious" only in the USO and we heard about it only after that ... as you yourself said, he wouldn't have played montreal/cincy with a serious injury , just only the USO ....

I agree about the serve not being effective at all, but like I already said delpo outplayed him from the ground as well, even a healthy nadal back then didn't have a serve close to delpo's, so how was he going to win even without an injury ?

mental strength, don't see it considering for that nadal would have to stay close to delpo and even if he somehow managed that , then delpo was quite strong himself mentally as well ... injury/no injury, he wouldn't have beaten delpo that year

 

[abmk]

I didn't say he couldn't turn the tide, I said he couldn't roll over Sod the way he could this year.

he couldn't have rolled over him even this year had sod not started playing cr*p after an excellent start ( in contrast to nadal who had a bad start, but picked up his play )

 

[veroniquem]

He had a bad start but once he warmed up, Sod had no chance.
I liked Rafa's game on grass in 2007 but it was still more Fed's peak (3 slams that year!!!!) than Rafa's peak year in any way.
This year is when Rafa wins 3 consecutive slams and it's not his peak? Let's be serious.
Rafa had 1 peak year as a teenager: 2005, then 2008 onwards. 2006 and 2007 were good on clay but they were years of "struggling" and "adjusting" on other surfaces.

 

[abmk]

He played much better in 2008. As I said, just look at Queen's, 2008 is the first time he played well there.

and yet nearly fell to istomin and fell to lopez this year there .... queens is not that good an indicator ...

he won that that year because he was riding high on his confidence on winning the FO playing the best CC tennis I've ever seen ( no, this year's FO play doesn't even come close, except for the finals )

IMHO, he served better in 2008 finals, but played better from the baseline in the 2007 finals ...both performances were almost equally good, only slight edge to 2008 , but fed's 2007 performance was clearly better than his 2008 one - he wasn't dumping second serves into the net on breakpoints in 2007, like he did in 2008 ...

 

[Trillus]

And once he turned the tide, he rolled over Sod, something he couldn't have done in 2007 even though as I said he wasn't playing terribly (far from it) but he was not at his peak on grass for sure.

He actually was rolling over Soderling and had he won match point to win in straight sets as he should have that is what he would have done for the whole match that year, not just the whole match minus the 1st set like this year.

That said I totally agree that Nadal 2010 > Nadal 2007, but Nadal 2007 was already a beast on grass. I dont know how you can say he wasnt formidable when he in many ways outplayed Federer in the 07 final inspite losing at a time Federer was completely unbeatable to anyone else on the surface.

 

[abmk]

He had a bad start but once he warmed up, Sod had no chance.

he'd have a chance if he actually stayed mentally in it and not started playing worse ( though rafa was favoured of course )

I liked Rafa's game on grass in 2007 but it was still more Fed's peak (3 slams that year!!!!) than Rafa's peak year in any way.

reverse it for 2008 ....

 

[Blinkism]

Yeah, I don't think Rafa is going to surpass Fed's career - BUT, as I've learnt in the last 12 months, you can't count Rafa out to do ANYTHING..

 

[abmk]

That's completely different. Early rounds, hard to get in the rhythm, he had that kind of problem vs Kendrick as well in previous years.
Borg used to say the hardest thing at Wimbledon was to get to the second week.

which is what happened vs sod at 2007 as well .....it was a 3rd round match , remember ?????

he played much better in the finals ....

 

[veroniquem]

He played very well for the first 4 sets. After the injury, it was all over.
I still think he was serving better in 2008, which on grass of course makes a big difference.

 

[abmk]

He played very well for the first 4 sets. After the injury, it was all over.

it sure as hell wasn't, he held serve 4 times after the time-out without facing any breakpoints ( twice in the 4th, twice in the 5th ) , had federer in trouble on his serve, twice in the 5th - had him at 15-40 at 1 all and 2 all ( fed bailed himself out with clutch play ) ... fed raised his level, outplayed him mentally , that's what happened ....nadal's play was unaffected by the injury/after the time-out

I still think he was serving better in 2008, which on grass of course makes a big difference.

I said the same thing - that he served better in 2008 ( but his baseline play was better in 2007 IMO )

 

[KingOfTennis]

its too hard to say anything atm. Nadal obviously had the better year this year but then anything can happen. Federer might come back and hold at the top until they both retire in which case Federer will be he greater player. Nadal might continue at this pace or even become stronger and continue for another X years which would make him the greatest ever. Anything can happen.

 

[jibers]

No, the logic is if 20 year old Nadal could bother PEAK Federer that much, peak Nadal would have eaten peak Federer for breakfast even on grass.

Thank you, That was my point. Nadal pushed Federer at his best when he was still not at his best, what would happen if Nadal now faced Fed of 2006-2007. He would beat him soundly.

 

[abmk]

Thank you, That was my point. Nadal pushed Federer at his best when he was still not at his best, what would happen if Nadal now faced Fed of 2006-2007. He would beat him soundly.

I already proved that post wrong clearly in many ways and now you praise her for that post ? :lol:

nadal was playing his best tennis ( or very close to it ) on grass in 2007 W final when federer beat him ....

 

[ksbh]

abmk & Veronika must have a lot of patience ... and tons of time :roll:

 

[abmk]

That's completely different. Early rounds, hard to get in the rhythm, he had that kind of problem vs Kendrick as well in previous years.
Borg used to say the hardest thing at Wimbledon was to get to the second week.

I already replied to this in one way ...

Let me add more thing,

the likes of sampras/federer/edberg/mcenroe didn't have that much trouble getting through the first week at wimbledon ...

in fact, from 2003, the first time fed was taken to a 5-setter at wimbledon in any round was - yeah, you guessed it right, wimby 2007 final

problem was/is more specific to borg ( who had completely modify his game from clay to grass ) and nadal - because the grass is faster/slicker in the first week

 

[abmk]

abmk & Veronika must have a lot of patience ... and tons of time :roll:

as far as I am concerned, well I am not a "pro" , so yeah, there we go ......

 

[ksbh]

ha ha, good retort, swamy

as far as I am concerned, well I am not a "pro" , so yeah, there we go ......

 

[jibers]

I already proved that post wrong clearly in many ways and now you praise her for that post ? :lol:

nadal was playing his best tennis ( or very close to it ) on grass in 2007 W final when federer beat him ....

3 things, either you hate Nadal, love federer or you are on drugs to think that Nadal in 2007 is close to what he is now. Proved what? Using some nonsensical point system? If Nadal could push Fed to 5 sets then, when he was a worse player, what would he do now?? Simple logic. He ould dominate him.

 

[CMM]

Federer said he can win 20 Slams and if he said so, it means he can do it.
Things change very fast in tennis, so we can't predict anything.
In February many people were saying that this year Federer will win the CYGS and Nadal will fall to 8-9 in the rankings.
At the beginning of 2009 many people were saying that Federer is done, he should retire, etc. Since then he won 3 Grand Slams.

All this stuff about GOATs and trying to predict the future is useless.

 

[abmk]

3 things, either you hate Nadal, love federer or you are on drugs to think that Nadal in 2007 is close to what he is now. Proved what? Using some nonsensical point system? If Nadal could push Fed to 5 sets then, when he was a worse player, what would he do now?? Simple logic. He ould dominate him.

LOL , you need to watch some tennis - you could start with the wimby 2007 final ....

I was talking about grass specifically ..., there really wasn't/isn't much difference b/w 2010 nadal and 2007 final nadal on grass

nadal beat federer in straight sets in miami 2004, so imagine what he would do to federer in miami 2005 if they played, when nadal was a much better player - oh wait, he lost

that's how stupid your logic is ...

 

[pc1]

Head to heads between Federer and Nadal is really hard to talk about because while Federer is generally close in most matches, it's a tough match up for Federer even when Nadal was younger. Federer seems to have a lot of problems with Nadal's serve, even when Nadal was serving in the low 100's. I guess it's the lefty spin and Nadal used the old lefty forehand to the Federer backhand trick even then.

So to say that current Nadal would crush peak Federer can't be proven. Maybe Federer would handle the improvements in Nadal's game better than Nadal's old style of play.

That being written I understand the logic.

 

[abmk]

Head to heads between Federer and Nadal is really hard to talk about because while Federer is generally close in most matches, it's a tough match up for Federer even when Nadal was younger. Federer seems to have a lot of problems with Nadal's serve, even when Nadal was serving in the low 100's. I guess it's the lefty spin and Nadal used the old lefty forehand to the Federer backhand trick even then.

So to say that current Nadal would crush peak Federer can't be proven. Maybe Federer would handle the improvements in Nadal's game better than Nadal's old style of play.

That being written I understand the logic.

except for FO 2008 F and TMC 2007 SF, most of their matches have been competitive ... heck, even this year, in madrid , even though nadal won in straights, he just won one more point than federer ... federer had a 4-2 lead in the 2nd set breaker and messed up on a FH dropper ( there was no way nadal could have gotten to it if it landed in ) and consequently lost it !

 

[fed_the_savior]

I'd say it's a definite maybe.

 

[TMF]

Nadal is still 7 slams behind Roger and he is going to be 25 when the FO is around. When Roger won the AO in 2006, he was 7 slams behind Sampras but he was 24. When he reached 25 at the 2006 US Open, Roger was only 5 slams away from Pete.

Another distinction is Roger was chasing Pete who’s already retire, but Rafa is chasing Roger who’s still active.

 

[Talker]

For the career stats, Fed started out slowly so his percentages will show that.

A way to get around it is to compare best years, Nadal needs to come up with some better years.

At the time Fed has 3 or 4 better years, this is way too much to explain away.

But Nadal has time to get the # of weeks, he needs that too and that will be about 4 more years at the top to do, at least get to #200.

There's no WTF's on his resume, this is a very tough tournament and he would need at least 2 of these or more to make up for other areas.

It doesn't look very good for Nadal right now unless he continues for years to play very well.

 

[JustBob]

The answer is no. One, because of his physical style of play he will not age as well as Federer. Two, he will never be as dominant on hard courts as Federer was and 1/2 the slams are played on hard. Three, I also doubt very much that he can win 5 Wimbledons.

 

[kishnabe]

Nadal will have the ocassional beatdown in a major which hinder his chances: 2007 AO Gonzo, 2008 AO Tsonga, 2010 AO Murray(tight match still), 2011 AO Ferrer, 2009 US Delpo! And has even more loses but they were real tight matches!

Obviously Nadal would bag 1-3 majors a year....most likely being one! If would take Nadal at least 3-7 years to surpass Federer if Federer has plateud or stagnated in achievements!

 

[Tyrus]

All i know is my gut says "maybe"

 

[Nadalfan89]

Well, Federer won 0 out the last 4 majors. Nadal won 3 out of the last 4 majors.

I think it's safe to say that Federer's days are done and the Nadal express is going full speed without breaks.

Add the fact that the FO is a virtual lock for Nadal for at least another 3 years, you already have Nadal at 12 slams.

He just needs 4 random slams from USO, AO and Wimbledon to reach Federer. I think that's very, very likely.

 

[Agassifan]

People are being stupid here.. Fed had a slow start to his career and then dominated the sport in a way that Nadal can only dream of. Nadal has had only one truly exceptional year, but that doesn't even come close to matching Fed's three best years (Nadal didn't even make the semis of the AO, won only 3 masters, lost in the WTF and had like 10 losses in the year).

 

[Mack-2]

Oh, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that Nadal will end up being regarded as a greater player than Federer, and the GOAT. That's almost guaranteed.

I'm just saying that even now, Nadal is statistically a better tennis player.

He's just better all around. No need to cry about it, champ.

Better all round? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Mack-2]

People are being stupid here.. Fed had a slow start to his career and then dominated the sport in a way that Nadal can only dream of. Nadal has had only one truly exceptional year, but that doesn't even come close to matching Fed's three best years (Nadal didn't even make the semis of the AO, won only 3 masters, lost in the WTF and had like 10 losses in the year).

Only one person is being stupid and his name is Nadalfan89

 

[SLD76]

Only one person is being stupid and his name is Nadalfan89

Whenever anyone starts a thread like this, I tell them to

1) look up Roger, then Rafa on wiki

2) compare career achievments/ records tied or set

3) immediately delete proposed thread.

 

[Mack-2]

Whenever anyone starts a thread like this, I tell them to

1) look up Roger, then Rafa on wiki

2) compare career achievments/ records tied or set

3) immediately delete proposed thread.

Hahahahaha
+1 my friend...you deserve it!

 

[Bobby Jr]

Well, Federer won 0 out the last 4 majors. Nadal won 3 out of the last 4 majors.

I think it's safe to say that Federer's days are done and the Nadal express is going full speed without breaks.

Where this falls over is the fact that Federer has done three slams in a year three times already. Nadal has done it only once.

You may think he has time to do it two more times but actually, his dominance year-round is far less likely than it was for Federer as his peers (those with a credible chance of beating him the odd time each year) are now maturing well - Djokovic, Soderling, Murray and you could also include Del Potro if fit and Berdych soon also... Federer's competition in his best years, by contrast, weren't nearly as close. So I'll predict that Nadal will never again do three slams in a year.

If he can manage two slams in a year, which I think he could - he'll still need to do it four times to pass Federer's current totals by age 30. That I cannot realistically see happening.

In addition, Federer has won 5 season ending championships - Nadal none. Nadal would need to win it basically every year left in his career from now on to pass Federer in that regard. That again is too much to ask given how others are coming into their zone.

 

[Hood_Man]

7 is a huge number. Granted he really closed the gap between himself and Federer last year (I almost did a double take when I figured out that Federer winning the 2010 AO put him TEN majors ahead of Nadal at the time), but if the improbable happened and Federer won the French Open and Wimbledon this year, Nadal would effectively have to repeat his entire career to even catch up.

And that's the problem*, Federer hasn't retired yet and he proved last year that he can still beat the top players on a regular basis. He even beat Nadal in their most important match of last year.

He even has a coach, who over time will at least help him work out strategies to beat these guys.



*The reason for the asterisk is that I actually don't consider it a problem. He doesn't need to overtake Federer. I don't think I'd mind finishing second to a guy who's considered by many to be the best player, or at least the most successful player, the sport has seen since the late 60's.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I think Federer will still win another 1 or 2 slams. So the number to reach/pass would be 17 or 18. Nadal should win the next 3 French Opens atleast. He could well win 2 or 3 of the next 3 Wimbledons. He has not real competition there for the next few years other than maybe Federer who isnt much a threat on grass to Nadal at this point. So he is up to 5 or 6. So he needs another 3 hard court slams around to be about tied with Federer. I think it will be close in the end.

 

[SLD76]

You may think he has time to do it two more times but actually, his dominance year-round is far less likely

You got that right. For someone who is so clearly a world number one, his consistency is dubious. Fed in his peak years was a beast inside and outside of majors. He collected Master Series, WTF and Major championships like so much candy. Rafa while unchallenged on clay, has had periods of complete ineffectuality during the summer HC swing( both preceeding and succeeding the USO). He can win a major and then lose shockingly to relative nobodies outside the top 10( see shanghai 2010).

His body, for whatever reasons( ill health or.....whatever) will not him maintain the dominant form that seemed so easy to maintain for Federer during his peak years.

 

[chrischris]

Will Nadal surpass Federer?
Actually with all the threads about whether Nadal has surpassed players like Lendl or others I thought it would be more interesting to see people's opinions if Nadal will ever surpass Federer. Now bear in mind I don't think it is that close yet but Nadal is a number of years younger than Federer and who knows in the future.

Here's some of the stats
Federer-Born August 8,1981
Nadal-Born June 3, 1986
Federer-Career won-lost 722-172 for a percentage of .8076
Nadal-Career won-lost 460-98 for a percentage of .8244
Federer-Majors won-majors entered-16 majors won out of 46 entered-.348
Nadal-Majors won-majors entered-9 majors won out of 26 entered-.346
Federer-63 tournaments won out of 227 entered for .2775
Nadal-42 tournaments won out of 136 entered or .3088

So right now Nadal has a better lifetime winning percentage, wins more tournaments by percentage than Federer.

Federer wins more tournaments by percentage in majors by a fraction, he's won more overall tournaments and more overall majors.

NO. Too many players that can hurt Rafa are popping up. Tomic, Del potro, Davy, Murray, Djoko. Especially on hard courts.

 

[CaptainKarma]

Well, Federer won 0 out the last 4 majors. Nadal won 3 out of the last 4 majors.

I think it's safe to say that Federer's days are done and the Nadal express is going full speed without breaks.

Add the fact that the FO is a virtual lock for Nadal for at least another 3 years, you already have Nadal at 12 slams.

He just needs 4 random slams from USO, AO and Wimbledon to reach Federer. I think that's very, very likely.

Even Nadal couldn't win the FO if he's injured. Injuries are more likely to be in his future, not slams.

 

[JustBob]

I think it's safe to say that Federer's days are done and the Nadal express is going full speed without breaks.

Well except for mediocre performances after the USO and losing a wheel at the AO...