Would you really have Federer play for your life?

[BHud]

I pick Rafa...my retirement funds will dry up shortly and I don't want to be around when that happens

 

[The_Order]

Can't recall the last point we were discussing, but the thread got deleted for some bizarre reason, was inoffensive. Maybe SLD someone got sensitive.

The rules are you can only pump up Federer's tyres. If not, you are a troll making troll threads and the ****s sook to mods to delete it.

 

[Chillaxer]

The rules are you can only pump up Federer's tyres. If not, you are a troll making troll threads and the ****s sook to mods to delete it.

It wasn't like I've even said anything against him, if Fed fans are so insecure even after all he's done that's a problem for them.
Why go sneaking to a mod, rather than just being adults?

 

[The_Order]

It wasn't like I've even said anything against him, if Fed fans are so insecure even after all he's done that's a problem for them.
Why go sneaking to a mod, rather than just being adults?

You made it sound like Federer only won because Nadal let him. The ****s don't like that.

 

[Chillaxer]

You made it sound like Federer only won because Nadal let him. The ****s don't like that.

OK, I'm getting an idea of it. It seems like it was a pretty objective conversation but maybe some people are too sensitive.

 

[dr. godmode]

I pick Rafa (unless he's injured). He fights till the end and chokes the least of those guys

 

[merlinpinpin]

So in what universe does Fed have a better h2h vs top 10 players than Nadal???

Rafa leads in EVERY stat, matches played, matches won, matches lost and the amount of leading h2h's. Yes sir, you fail.

In a universe when you don't (stupidly) consider current top 10 players, but all the top 10 players they have played in their career, which is what this stat is about.

Truth is, their % are pretty similar, with Federer's being slightly superior. But most of Nadal's wins came on clay, and if you pick Nadal and the match is on any surface but clay (which is far more than an even chance), then you're in mucho trouble, no?

Edit: quick calculation shows that Nadal closed the gap this year, and they now stand at 66% win percentage vs top 10's. Most of Nadal's wins still came on clay, though (8 of his 10 top 10 wins in 2012), so the point still stands. If the game is not played on clay, pick Nadal and your chance of survival is about 50%, or maybe even less, which is scary at best.

 

[mightyrick]

Hey, did you see my original post? I quoted an idiot that said Fed has a better h2h against top 10 players than Nadal which is CLEARLY not true.

You then tried to come up with a bullSHlT point about primes, but I pissed on that too so now you can't say anything except that? LOL you fail too pal.

I didn't have a BS point about primes. I was saying that comparison at least of the players in their primes was more valid than comparing Nadal in his prime against Federer past his prime. Which is completely valid.

Lastly, I was just trying to understand the conclusion or point you were trying to make in all of this. But all you did was restate that Nadal/Federer top-10 statistic.

If you are correcting a point from a prior poster... and that was the intention... ok fine. I'll offer my apologies and move on.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I didn't have a BS point about primes. I was saying that comparison at least of the players in their primes was more valid than comparing Nadal in his prime against Federer past his prime. Which is completely valid.

Lastly, I was just trying to understand the conclusion or point you were trying to make in all of this. But all you did was restate that Nadal/Federer top-10 statistic.

If you are correcting a point from a prior poster... and that was the intention... ok fine. I'll offer my apologies and move on.

You definitely have to move on.

Unless you are the sort of person, that likes to be PWNed every time (which, by the looks of it, you are).

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Rafa would be a sensible pick between Feb and mid-June.

Hafa picks sensibly all the time!

 

[YouCantBeSerious]

That's easy:

Fed's peak: 2004-2007
Fed's prime: 2003-2009

Similar to most open era tennis greats before him like Sampras, Lendl etc.

The real mystery is when did Nadal peak? All these years on this forum I have yet to get a straight answer out of any of his fans.

And no saying, middle of 2008, first 2 months of 2009, 2nd half of 2010 isn't a straight answer LOL.

Unfortunately, there are two key issues in the case of Rafa which make pointing out a peak difficult. The first issue is the fact that Rafa has evolved as a tennis player in surfaces out of clay differently obviously than in clay. The second is the obvious problem with injury. It's too bad he hasn't had a relatively free injury career (compared with Fed, for example). However it's no use lamenting that fact, as i see it as a direct consequence of his style of play.

That's your opinion, many will disagree. Regardless, one doesn't have to be exclusive to the other, it might be a combination of Fed declining and Nadal improving.

Yes, it could be. My point is that you need to take into account the quality of the opposition as yet another very important factor.

As far as I'm concerned, not necessarily, for example I feel Fed's highest level of play was in 2005 despite the fact that statistically 2006 was a better year (even 2007 if you value slams above anything else).

But what makes you feel that way is the level of play that Fed sustained, right? The way he won matches?

And they also depend on the level of Federer.

Of course.

Yeah, but if for example if we presume (for the sake of the argument, not saying you personally do) Federer from 2008+ as a lesser opponent than a 2004-2007 Fed then your point would apply in that case as well.

Yes, it's relative. Relying on results alone is not a good guide, I think play is more important. Also, results can be deceiving. Take for example USO last year. Fed lost in the semi, but could it have gotten any closer to a victory for him?

Let's see, in 2008 Fed:

-got destroyed by Mardy Fish (who was serving 30% 1st serves in)
-lost to Karlovic for the first time ever
-lost to Blake for the first time ever
-lost to Stepanek for the first time ever
-lost to Roddick for the first time after 5 years
-went into USO that year without having a single HC final (let alone a title) under his belt
-was on the brink of losing in early rounds at both AO and USO

etc. etc.

So are those guys challenging opponents against Fed? How come they weren't so before 2008? I guess it was a collective improvement on their behalf while Fed remained the same?

No. In this case Occam's Razor dictates Fed went into a rough patch.

You offer very good arguments, and I don't disagree with them basically. I guess my point applies more to the previous section of Fed's career (up to 2008). I just feel he wasn't tested remotely as much (for example) during his first 7 slam run.

Also, do you think Fed steadily declined in Wimbledon from 2006 to 2008, or do you think it's Nadal's improvement in grass that can be the main contributor to this?

Fed from 2010 to now is clearly in decline though, no doubt about it. The fact that he just won Wimbledon is simply amazing, and a part of me wants to see him take a few more (with Nadal subsequently breaking that record a few years later, of course).

 

[YouCantBeSerious]

Rafa would be a sensible pick between Feb and mid-June.

Nicely done, I must say.

 

[Federer20042006]

Depends on what information is available to me.

If it's entirely blind, yes. He's the best pick. You just pick him and pray Nadal's not on the other side of the net.

But if you know it's going to be on clay, you pick Nadal.

If you know it's going to be against Nadal, you pick Nadal...if you have the option.

Tons of different possibilities.

 

[The_Order]

In a universe when you don't (stupidly) consider current top 10 players, but all the top 10 players they have played in their career, which is what this stat is about.

Truth is, their % are pretty similar, with Federer's being slightly superior. But most of Nadal's wins came on clay, and if you pick Nadal and the match is on any surface but clay (which is far more than an even chance), then you're in mucho trouble, no?

Edit: quick calculation shows that Nadal closed the gap this year, and they now stand at 66% win percentage vs top 10's. Most of Nadal's wins still came on clay, though (8 of his 10 top 10 wins in 2012), so the point still stands. If the game is not played on clay, pick Nadal and your chance of survival is about 50%, or maybe even less, which is scary at best.

But most of Fed's wins came on HC which is his best surface, so I guess they don't count either then...

This is a FACT, out of all top 30 players Rafa has faced at least 3 times only Davydenko and Hrbaty have a winning h2h. Davydenko only leads 6-5 and Hrbaty 3-1 but all of those wins were when Nadal was not ranked top 10.

With Fed there are a host of players with a leading h2h in top 30 that have played at least 3 times.

Fed hasn't had leading h2h against Rafa or Murray and Novak has closed the gap and will most likely surpass him as well.

Rafa otoh is comfortably leading h2h against the other big 3.

 

[The_Order]

OK, I'm getting an idea of it. It seems like it was a pretty objective conversation but maybe some people are too sensitive.

Too sensitive is an understatement for these type of people.

I'll give you an example; During the Olympic final when Murray was smashing Fed, one **** said "I would eat a piece of sh*t for Fed to come back and win this".

 

[Eureka]

Another meaningless thread. Nadal can, in certain circumstances play to win at all costs. But with his knees as they are, I'd choose Rosol over him! So those embarking on these deep discussions should bear in mind that none of these players is entirely dependable on a bad day. And on a good day, any of them could outplay the other.

The point about Federer is that I'd be happy dying watching him play his best tennis. It would be like going from the exquisite to the sublime. A beautiful transition as breath left my body.

 

[abmk]

So in what universe does Fed have a better h2h vs top 10 players than Nadal???

Rafa leads in EVERY stat, matches played, matches won, matches lost and the amount of leading h2h's. Yes sir, you fail.

the universe of reality :

when you say top 10, you count the matches when the player is actually in the top 10 ......

federer is 157-77 vs top 10 (67.1%)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Roger-Federer.aspx?t=mr

nadal is 99-61 vs top 10 (66%)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Top-Players/Rafael-Nadal.aspx?t=mr

about the rest of your post ( which I didn't quote ) , its totally skewed and garbage..... why only the current top 10 ? federer played plenty of other top players are not in the top 10 now, but were earlier. ( so did rafa, but to a lesser extent ) ...... those don't count ? LOL .......