- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: After Today's Fiasco is Federer NOW GREATER than Nadal?
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:35 pm to RummelTiger
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:35 pm to RummelTiger
quote:
Of course Federeredrrer is greater than Nadal. Just like LeBron is greater than Kobe. No brainers....
There ya go................
0
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:35 pm to TulaneTigerFan
Taking clay out of the equation is ridiculously stupid, anyways.
Is clay not one of the surfaces on which they play?
Is clay not one of the surfaces on which they play?
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:38 pm to ChiSaint
quote:
I think it depends on how you define better. Nadal is clearly a better clay court player than Federer. On hard courts and grass, Fed has a way more impressive resume and has held his own against Nadal (8-7 Fed lead).
I find if kind of funny that Fed being the second best clay court player of his generation has hurt his standing in a lot of people's eyes. If he'd been like Sampras and routinely lost in the 4th round of clay court tourneys, his h-2-h with Nadal would look a lot better.
I agree.
1. Fed clearly has a better overall resume at this point, but Nadal probably has more tennis left in him than Fed (assuming Nadal's knees hold up).
2. The head to head is hard to ignore, Nadal really has owned Fed.
3. That being said, the head to head is a bit misleading b/c Nadal would lose fairly often in early rounds of non clay tourneys when Fed was in his prime, thus preventing Fed from getting to play him as often on grass and hard court.
4. I don't think today's match really has too much of an impact on the overall argument. These guys have played in a lot of tournaments through the years.
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:38 pm to GatorsGators
quote:
Taking clay out of the equation is ridiculously stupid, anyways.
Is clay not one of the surfaces on which they play?
It's not a matter of taking it out of the equation. It's even more stupid to cite the head to head as if it exists in a vacuum without looking at the determining factors. Anybody think the head to head would be a little different if Nadal was making finals at the USO every season from 04-08?, but Federer was flaming out early at the FO?
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:48 pm to GatorsGators
quote:
Is clay not one of the surfaces on which they play?
So are indoor hard courts (where Fed is 4-0).
What the h-2-h shows me is that Nadal is a significantly better clay court player than Fed. Otherwise, it's close.
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:51 pm to ChiSaint
So they're about the same on hardcourt and grass, while Nadal completely dominates Federer on clay. Does that not mean that Nadal has been better overall?
Posted on 6/24/13 at 4:56 pm to GatorsGators
quote:
So they're about the same on hardcourt and grass, while Nadal completely dominates Federer on clay. Does that not mean that Nadal has been better overall?
The point several people were making is that Nadal lost a lot of hard court (and grass) tourneys before he even got to play Fed, so the stats are misleading.
We all know the Grand Slam count (17 to 12). I'll also point out that Fed has won 77 titles overall compared to Nadal's 57. I believe Nadal's overall winning percentage is a touch higher though (.835 to .815).
This is a debate that will probably never be settled, but at the very least it won't be until both men have retired.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News