Win/Loss % - Federer, Lendl, Wilander and Kuerten at French Open During Primes

M

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
A lot of discussion about how Federer compares to Lendl, Wilander, and Kuerten at the French Open.

Looking at their 8 year primes against all opponents. I think we would all agree that four all have a very defined 8 year prime at the French Open.

Lendl - 1981-1988 - 44-5 (89.80%) in matches 138-33 (80.70%) in sets
Wilander - 1982-1989 - 44-5 (89.80%) in matches 133-42 (76.00%) in sets
Kuerten - 1997-2004 - 36-5 (87.80%) in matches 112-42 (72.73%) in sets
Federer - 2005-2012 - 45-7 (86.54%) in matches 139-39 (78.09%) in sets

Now if you removed one player from their career - Wilander From Lendl's Career, Lendl from Wilander's Career, Kafelnikov from Kuerten's Career, and Nadal from Federer's Career.

Lendl - 1981-1988 - 42-3 (93.33%) in matches 129-26 (83.23%) in sets
Wilander - 1982-1989 42-3 (93.33%) in matches 126-33 (79.25%) in sets
Kuerten - 1997-2004 33-5 (86.84%) in matches 103-37 (73.57%) in sets
Federer - 2005-2012 - 45-2 (95.74%) in matches 135-24 (84.91%) in sets
 
Lol. How desperate?! :lol:

Slam TITLES matter. You know, the actual tournament wins. :roll:

Lendl- 3
Wilander- 3
Kuerten- 3
Federer- 1

End of story!
 
Lendl and Wilander were very unlucky to hit their clay primes at the same time.

Without each other, they would likely have been at least 4-times champions, and maybe 5-times.
 
Interesting and revealing statistics OP. Federer really is in their league as a clay court player, but just had the misfortune of running up against the buzzsaw that is Nadal.
 
McEnroeisanartist said:
A lot of discussion about how Federer compares to Lendl, Wilander, and Kuerten at the French Open.

Looking at their 8 year primes against all opponents. I think we would all agree that four all have a very defined 8 year prime at the French Open.

Lendl - 1981-1988 - 44-5 (89.80%) in matches 138-33 (80.70%) in sets
Wilander - 1982-1989 - 44-5 (89.80%) in matches 133-42 (76.00%) in sets
Kuerten - 1997-2004 - 36-5 (87.80%) in matches 112-42 (72.73%) in sets
Federer - 2005-2012 - 45-7 (86.54%) in matches 139-39 (78.09%) in sets

Now if you removed one player from their career - Wilander From Lendl's Career, Lendl from Wilander's Career, Kafelnikov from Kuerten's Career, and Nadal from Federer's Career.

Lendl - 1981-1988 - 42-3 (93.33%) in matches 129-26 (83.23%) in sets
Wilander - 1982-1989 42-3 (93.33%) in matches 126-33 (79.25%) in sets
Kuerten - 1997-2004 33-5 (86.84%) in matches 103-37 (73.57%) in sets
Federer - 2005-2012 - 45-2 (95.74%) in matches 135-24 (84.91%) in sets
Click to expand...

Name the great RG champions who Federer has defeated at the French.
 
Look, at the end of the day, Federer is perceived by many as the greatest tennis player of this generation and all time, surely, he could have beaten Nadal at least once at the FO. He was given enough chances. He just wasn't good enough to win multiple French Opens. He's a good clay courter, not a great clay courter. Period.
 
Anaconda said:
Look, at the end of the day, Federer is perceived by many as the greatest tennis player of this generation and all time, surely, he could have beaten Nadal at least once at the FO. He was given enough chances. He just wasn't good enough to win multiple French Opens. He's a good clay courter, not a great clay courter. Period.
Click to expand...

As a Federer fan I have to agree with you, that is the bottom line. All of these excuses are priceless.
 
Anaconda said:
Look, at the end of the day, Federer is perceived by many as the greatest tennis player of this generation and all time, surely, he could have beaten Nadal at least once at the FO. He was given enough chances. He just wasn't good enough to win multiple French Opens. He's a good clay courter, not a great clay courter. Period.
Click to expand...

The fact that he was only consistently stopped by Nadal is what makes him, to me, a great claycourter. Nadal is the best ever on the surface, as well as a bad matchup for Federer. No way Nadal's level on hardcourts from 2004-2006 was great at all, but he still went 2-1 against Federer in their first three hardcourt matches, while getting blown out by guys like Berdych and Blake. That clearly shows a matchup problem. It was only further exacerbated on clay. The number of big clay court titles and finals (not counting the mickey mouse tournaments Muster and Vilas used to mop up) Federer has as well as his number of RG finals is equal or better to many "great" claycourters, he was just consistently stopped by Nadal. The guy has been beaten by Nadal FIVE times at RG, when he would have been a clear favorite in at least four of those years (2008 vs Djokovic is debatable). Add to that a couple Madrid titles, a few Monte Carlo titles, and two Rome titles, all taken by Nadal.
 
Anaconda said:
Look, at the end of the day, Federer is perceived by many as the greatest tennis player of this generation and all time, surely, he could have beaten Nadal at least once at the FO. He was given enough chances. He just wasn't good enough to win multiple French Opens. He's a good clay courter, not a great clay courter. Period.
Click to expand...

Exactly. He had five cracks and failed. He wasn't good enough to beat the best clay-courter/RG champion of his generation at his peakest of peaks. Kuerten, Lendl and Wilander are greater than him on clay and always will be. The end.
 
Anti-Fedal said:
Exactly. He had five cracks and failed. He wasn't good enough to beat the best clay-courter/RG champion of his generation at his peakest of peaks. Kuerten, Lendl and Wilander are greater than him on clay and always will be. The end.
Click to expand...

bset RG Champion of all time. Not just of his generation. A little crazy to think that one guy - Nadal - will be going for his 9th title there - the combined total of Wilander, Lendl, and Kuerten.
 
Stats dont lie.

Without Nadal, Federer would be at 25 majors.

Without Federer, Nadal may add a couple more.

Big Big Difference.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
You must've been drinking some good liquor tonight- send it over to me when you've finished with it! :)
Click to expand...

You don't reckon? I'd say Djokovic with 14 slams and a winning h2h record over Federer, Nadal and Murray will give him passage to GOAT status, he obviously has to win the FO to seal the deal.
 
Anaconda said:
You don't reckon? I'd say Djokovic with 14 slams and a winning h2h record over Federer, Nadal and Murray will give him passage to GOAT status, he obviously has to win the FO to seal the deal.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. It can be difficult to tell at times on this forum.
 
It's fun how Nadal fans lose here in any case.

If Fed is just a 1 RG champion and is not good on clay, this means Nadal had weak competition.

But if we say Fed is amazing clay courter and without Nadal he is with Kuerten, so Nadal beat a tough guy, this means Fed is a clay legend and makes him even more goat :).

So, Nadal fans have to either admit:
-Nadal is in weak clay era
-Or Federer is greater on clay than his results
 
It's a fact that Federer never defeated any top clay courter in his entire career at the french.
 
Last edited:
McEnroeisanartist said:
Looking at their 8 year primes against all opponents. I think we would all agree that four all have a very defined 8 year prime at the French Open.

Lendl - 1981-1988 - 44-5 (89.80%) in matches 138-33 (80.70%) in sets
Click to expand...
I don't think that's quite right for Lendl. 1983-1990 would be more apt surely? They are the years which are closer to bookending his prime at the majors.

>>> Lendl 1983-1990. 38-4 (90.5%)
 
Last edited:
jg153040 said:
It's fun how Nadal fans lose here in any case.

If Fed is just a 1 RG champion and is not good on clay, this means Nadal had weak competition.

But if we say Fed is amazing clay courter and without Nadal he is with Kuerten, so Nadal beat a tough guy, this means Fed is a clay legend and makes him even more goat :).

So, Nadal fans have to either admit:
-Nadal is in weak clay era
-Or Federer is greater on clay than his results
Click to expand...

Actually, IMHO if we are going to play the era game -- the clay era from 03-till date is easily the weakest of all time.

And no sorry, Kuerten is better than Fed.
 
helloworld said:
Djokovic? So now a guy with absolutely 0 FO and only 1 final is a top clay courter?? Maybe Sampras with 1 SF is a top clay courter too? LOL!! Oh my, this must be the weakest clay era in tennis history!!
Click to expand...

yeah, ignoramus, because 1 final & 3 semis @ RG are anywhere near 1 semi @ RG. :roll:

oh and btw federer's victories over djoker at RG 11 and over delpo in RG 09 are as impressive as any that Lendl, Wilander Kuerten had ...
 
tennisaddict said:
Stats dont lie.

Without Nadal, Federer would be at 25 majors.

Without Federer, Nadal may add a couple more.

Big Big Difference.
Click to expand...

Yup

Nadal won his majors having beaten Federer many times on his way.

Federer, on the other hand, didn't have to do the dirty work.

Big Big Difference.
 
sunny_cali said:
Actually, IMHO if we are going to play the era game -- the clay era from 03-till date is easily the weakest of all time.

And no sorry, Kuerten is better than Fed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I said they have a dilemma.

We can choose both. Some people choose Fed is better clay courter, some people choose weak era, that means Nadal is not that great on clay

Either way it makes Fed look good:
-weak clay era means Nadal is not a threat to Fed in goat, since 85% of his titles is clay.
-or Fed is much better clay courter than his results, makes him look good

I was pointing out the irony, that any argument makes Fed look good :)

Because it's hard to argue against 17 GS champ and a 5 RG finalist :)
 
edk1512 said:
Yup

Nadal won his majors having beaten Federer many times on his way.

Federer, on the other hand, didn't have to do the dirty work.

Big Big Difference.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Federer was playing in a weak era, since he didn't have to play himself.

Your argument makes a lot of sense.
 
LazyNinja19 said:
Lol. How desperate?! :lol:

Slam TITLES matter. You know, the actual tournament wins. :roll:

Lendl- 3
Wilander- 3
Kuerten- 3
Federer- 1

End of story!
Click to expand...

Amazing. A Nadal fan finally comes clean and speaks the unbearable truth. And to even embolden them for our edification - it's just delightful. You are spot on old man, "Slam TITLES matter. You know, the actual tournament wins." If only others were as accepting of the painful reality.
 
LazyNinja19 said:
Lol. How desperate?! :lol:

Slam TITLES matter. You know, the actual tournament wins. :roll:

Lendl- 3
Wilander- 3
Kuerten- 3
Federer- 1

End of story!
Click to expand...

These types of threads are not directed at all nadal fans, but i'm pretty sure the op does these because it exposes some of the hypocrisy the trolls constantly spew out.

Federer has all the measurable statistics on his side. He has many records and leads in all the categories thought to be important by tennis experts.

There is a large contingency of anti-fed or pro-nadal/sampras fans that like to massage data. They try to add things in that are not objectively measurable and constantly harp on silly things like "weak era." It is pretty funny when these same fans don't recognize the op is essentially copying their argument format.

It is impossible to argue weak era vs federer and not nadal, while claiming they are from the same era. How can one look at fed's hard court and grass competition and tell people with a straight face it was easier than nadal's clay court competition. How can someone argue Federer is a lesser player for consistently making it deeper in all tournaments is knock on his legacy? How can someone argue that h2h is only important when it adversely affects fed?

These are some of the common anti-fed arguments that are completely off based and full of hypocrisy.
 
edk1512 said:
Yup

Nadal won his majors having beaten Federer many times on his way.

Federer, on the other hand, didn't have to do the dirty work.

Big Big Difference.
Click to expand...

What great clay court players did nadal beat at the french to win his titles?

Do you acknowledge that Nadal and Federer are from the same era or not? If they are, goodbye weak era argument. If they are not, then of course an older federer should be troubled by a younger nadal. Even past the age of 32 and well past his best playing years federer is still challenging the top players of today in their primes. I don't see how this lends to the idea that Fed played in a weak era.
 
its an interesting discussion... surprised no one has mentioned Gugas straight sets win over Fed at the 2004 FO... im a massive Fed fan i consider him and Laver Equal goats... but i have a huge respect for Rafa... why cant we just acknowledge that they are both in the top 5 players ever... im saying Laver, Fed, Rafa, Rosewall, Sampras (no particular order)... and until rafa equals Feds slam record Rafa cant be considered Goat based on the H2H when Feds Career is superior... if Rafa wins an equal amount of majors to Fed then the H2H sways goat to Rafa...back to the clay court theme of the thread... you cant say Fed is on equal terms with those other guys on clay as much as i want to you just cant... maybe if he won 2 FO you could given how much better his career is than the others... but he does only have one title and he lost to Guga easily in 2004 and by then Guga was basically done... granted Fed was just starting the dream run and only had 2 majors at that point but he was close to prime... Fed is lacking a big tough hard fought out win in a major final IMO he is lacking a career definining match (closest i get is W 07 and that is pretty impressive W 09 is also good but its against roddick so that puts it down a peg)... had he won just one of those FO finals or W 08 or AO 09 we wouldnt be having this Goat discussion if would be clear cut.
1.Nadal
2.Borg
3.Lendl
4.Wilander
5.Guga
6.Courier
7.Brugera
8.Federer
9.Muster
10.Kodes (two titles but Fed and Muster have to be considered better)
11.Chang
ect... all the other one slammers... and thats not even counting rosewall and laver who had one amerture and one Open era FO title.
 
PCS_Super said:
i you cant say Fed is on equal terms with those other guys on clay as much as i want to you just cant... maybe if he won 2 FO you could given how much better his career is than the others... but he does only have one title and he lost to Guga easily in 2004 and by then Guga was basically done... granted Fed was just starting the dream run and only had 2 majors at that point but he was close to prime... Fed is lacking a big tough hard fought out win in a major final IMO he is lacking a career definining match (closest i get is W 07 and that is pretty impressive W 09 is also good but its against roddick so that puts it down a peg)... had he won just one of those FO finals or W 08 or AO 09 we wouldnt be having this Goat discussion if would be clear cut.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. It's not that Fed lost 5 times to Rafa at the FO -- it is his inability to sneak at least one of them out (And lets not talk about the AO losses either!). If Guga got 5 cracks against Rafa, based on what I saw of him I am pretty sure he takes at least 1 of them.
 
Chanwan said:
And Nadal defeated?
Click to expand...

Rafael Nadal
2005 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Lars Burgsmuller (6-1, 7-6, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Xavier Malisse (6-2, 6-2, 6-4)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Richard Gasquet (6-4, 6-3, 6-2)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Sebastien Grosjean (6-4, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. David Ferrer (7-5, 6-2, 6-0)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Mariano Puerta (6-7, 6-3, 6-1, 7-5)

2006 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling (6-2, 7-5, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Kevin Kim (6-2, 6-1, 6-4)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Paul-Henri Mathieu (5-7, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-2, 5-7, 6-4, 6-2)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 6-4 ret.)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Ivan Ljubicic (6-4, 6-2, 7-6)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6)

2007 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Juan Martin del Potro (7-5, 6-3, 6-2)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Flavio Cipolla (6-2, 6-1, 6-4)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Albert Montanes (6-1, 6-3, 6-2)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-3, 6-1, 7-6)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Carlos Moya (6-4, 6-3, 6-0)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (7-5, 6-4, 6-2)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4)

2008 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Thomaz Bellucci (7-5, 6-3, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Devilder (6-4, 6-0, 6-1)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Jarkko Nieminen (6-1, 6-3, 6-1)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Fernando Verdasco (6-1, 6-0, 6-2)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro (6-1, 6-1, 6-1)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 6-2, 7-6)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)

2009 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Marcos Daniel (7-5, 6-4, 6-3)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Teymuraz Gabashvili (6-1, 6-4, 6-2)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-1, 6-3, 6-1)
R16: Robin Soderling def. Rafael Nadal (6-2, 6-7, 6-4, 7-6)

2010 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Gianni Mina (6-2, 6-2, 6-2)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Horacio Zeballos (6-2, 6-2, 6-3)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-3, 6-4, 6-3)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Thomaz Bellucci (6-2, 7-5, 6-4)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro (7-6, 7-6, 6-4)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Jurgen Melzer (6-2, 6-3, 7-6)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling (6-4, 6-2, 6-4)

2011 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. John Isner (6-4, 6-7, 6-7, 6-2, 6-4)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Pablo Andujar (7-5, 6-3, 7-6)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Antonio Veic (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Ivan Ljubicic (7-5, 6-3, 6-3)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling (6-4, 6-1, 7-6)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Andy Murray (6-4, 7-5, 6-4)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 7-6, 5-7, 6-1)

2012 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Simone Bolelli (6-2, 6-2, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Denis Istomin (6-2, 6-2, 6-0)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Eduardo Schwank (6-1, 6-3, 6-4)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Juan Monaco (6-2, 6-0, 6-0)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro (7-6, 6-2, 6-3)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. David Ferrer (6-2, 6-2, 6-1)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 6-3, 2-6, 7-5)

2013 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Daniel Brands (4-6, 7-6, 6-4, 6-3)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Martin Klizan (4-6, 6-3, 6-3, 6-3)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Fabio Fognini (7-6, 6-4, 6-4)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Kei Nishikori (6-4, 6-1, 6-3)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Stanislas Wawrinka (6-2, 6-3, 6-1)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 3-6, 6-1, 6-7, 9-7)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. David Ferrer (6-3, 6-2, 6-3)
 
Mustard said:
Rafael Nadal
2005 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Lars Burgsmuller (6-1, 7-6, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Xavier Malisse (6-2, 6-2, 6-4)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Richard Gasquet (6-4, 6-3, 6-2)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Sebastien Grosjean (6-4, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. David Ferrer (7-5, 6-2, 6-0)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Mariano Puerta (6-7, 6-3, 6-1, 7-5)

2006 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling (6-2, 7-5, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Kevin Kim (6-2, 6-1, 6-4)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Paul-Henri Mathieu (5-7, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-2, 5-7, 6-4, 6-2)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 6-4 ret.)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Ivan Ljubicic (6-4, 6-2, 7-6)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6)

2007 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Juan Martin del Potro (7-5, 6-3, 6-2)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Flavio Cipolla (6-2, 6-1, 6-4)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Albert Montanes (6-1, 6-3, 6-2)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-3, 6-1, 7-6)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Carlos Moya (6-4, 6-3, 6-0)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (7-5, 6-4, 6-2)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4)

2008 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Thomaz Bellucci (7-5, 6-3, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Devilder (6-4, 6-0, 6-1)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Jarkko Nieminen (6-1, 6-3, 6-1)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Fernando Verdasco (6-1, 6-0, 6-2)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro (6-1, 6-1, 6-1)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 6-2, 7-6)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)

2009 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Marcos Daniel (7-5, 6-4, 6-3)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Teymuraz Gabashvili (6-1, 6-4, 6-2)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-1, 6-3, 6-1)
R16: Robin Soderling def. Rafael Nadal (6-2, 6-7, 6-4, 7-6)

2010 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Gianni Mina (6-2, 6-2, 6-2)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Horacio Zeballos (6-2, 6-2, 6-3)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Lleyton Hewitt (6-3, 6-4, 6-3)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Thomaz Bellucci (6-2, 7-5, 6-4)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro (7-6, 7-6, 6-4)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Jurgen Melzer (6-2, 6-3, 7-6)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling (6-4, 6-2, 6-4)

2011 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. John Isner (6-4, 6-7, 6-7, 6-2, 6-4)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Pablo Andujar (7-5, 6-3, 7-6)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Antonio Veic (6-1, 6-3, 6-0)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Ivan Ljubicic (7-5, 6-3, 6-3)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Robin Soderling (6-4, 6-1, 7-6)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Andy Murray (6-4, 7-5, 6-4)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Roger Federer (7-5, 7-6, 5-7, 6-1)

2012 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Simone Bolelli (6-2, 6-2, 6-1)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Denis Istomin (6-2, 6-2, 6-0)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Eduardo Schwank (6-1, 6-3, 6-4)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Juan Monaco (6-2, 6-0, 6-0)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Nicolas Almagro (7-6, 6-2, 6-3)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. David Ferrer (6-2, 6-2, 6-1)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 6-3, 2-6, 7-5)

2013 French Open
R128: Rafael Nadal def. Daniel Brands (4-6, 7-6, 6-4, 6-3)
R64: Rafael Nadal def. Martin Klizan (4-6, 6-3, 6-3, 6-3)
R32: Rafael Nadal def. Fabio Fognini (7-6, 6-4, 6-4)
R16: Rafael Nadal def. Kei Nishikori (6-4, 6-1, 6-3)
QF: Rafael Nadal def. Stanislas Wawrinka (6-2, 6-3, 6-1)
SF: Rafael Nadal def. Novak Djokovic (6-4, 3-6, 6-1, 6-7, 9-7)
FR: Rafael Nadal def. David Ferrer (6-3, 6-2, 6-3)
Click to expand...

thanks - however, my question was as to who of these players helloworld considers a top clay courter. We know it ain't Novak. Moya at the tail end of his career in 2007? Federer?
 
jg153040 said:
Yeah, Federer was playing in a weak era, since he didn't have to play himself.

Your argument makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

Umm, LOL
Federer didn't beat Nadal at the French, did he?
Nadal beat Federer in AO, FO and Wimbledon.

GoaLaSSo said:
What great clay court players did nadal beat at the french to win his titles?

Do you acknowledge that Nadal and Federer are from the same era or not? If they are, goodbye weak era argument. If they are not, then of course an older federer should be troubled by a younger nadal. Even past the age of 32 and well past his best playing years federer is still challenging the top players of today in their primes. I don't see how this lends to the idea that Fed played in a weak era.
Click to expand...

Federer didn't beat Nadal at the French. Nadal did beat him 5 times. Nadal is at least a level ahead of Federer.

Federer was in his prime in at least 3 of these matches, so no age excuse.

Povl Carstensen said:
Not Federers fault if Nadal didn't do the work.
Click to expand...

Not Lendl's or Wilander's or Kuerten's fault either that they won and lost to other clay greats.

tennisaddict said:
Difference is Fed lost only to Nadal, while Nadal lost to everyone except Fed.
Click to expand...

Difference is Nadal beat and lost to everyone. Fed didn't beat Nadal outside Wimbledon.
 
Chanwan said:
thanks - however, my question was as to who of these players helloworld considers a top clay courter. We know it ain't Novak. Moya at the tail end of his career in 2007? Federer?
Click to expand...

Question mark with Federer? Federer is supposed to be on the level of Kuerten, Lendl and Wilander at the French Open (according to some), yet Federer isn't considered to be a top clay-court player in Nadal's era? Please explain this paradox.
 
Mustard said:
Question mark with Federer? Federer is supposed to be on the level of Kuerten, Lendl and Wilander at the French Open (according to some), yet Federer isn't considered to be a top clay-court player in Nadal's era? Please explain this paradox.
Click to expand...

it's not my opinion, but my guess is that it's helloworld's - hence the question to him.
 
edk1512 said:
Federer didn't beat Nadal at the French. Nadal did beat him 5 times. Nadal is at least a level ahead of Federer.

Federer was in his prime in at least 3 of these matches, so no age excuse.
Click to expand...

You basically dodged all the main points of my argument, including that weak era argument is a bunch of bull. Nadal is certainly a better clay court player than fed, but fed is clearly the best clay courter nadal has had to play. Where does that leave his legacy if certain nadal fans are so concerned with "weak eras."

Federer has had to face numerous hard court and grass court major champions and tougher competition than nadal has had to face on clay.

I'm honestly not hating on Nadal. I think his FO titles show the greatest dominance of a surface in history, but nadal fans are constantly bringing in subjective stuff like "weak era" arguments that should definitely apply to both Fed and Nadal if the argument actually was worth anything.
 
Fed's the most accomplished bridesmaid of the three, that's for sure. He could host a dinner party with all those RG runner-up trophies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
How can Kuerten, Wilander, and Lendl be ranked above Federer at French?
10 11 12
Replies
580
Views
35K
Povl Carstensen
P
K
5-set Slam finals
Replies
37
Views
4K
JaoSousa
JaoSousa
Biotic
  • Poll Poll
Federer and Connors vs younger ATGs at Slams
Replies
18
Views
1K
Kralingen
K
ghostofMecir
Sinner could join Federer as the only players ever..
2
Replies
89
Views
3K
nolefam_2024
N
yellowoctopus
US Open Champions and their backhands
Replies
5
Views
2K
yellowoctopus
yellowoctopus
Back
Top