I still think Nadal will surpass Fed as the best ever. He is going to win a ton more masters events...he has the individual gold medal... and he really has dominated Fed head to head.
I Nadal wins this tourney he will have a chance at the Nadal slam in Melbourne...and that would be something special.
It does raise a excellent question.
Can you be considered the greatest ever when you have been really dominated by the second best player during your era and arguably the #1. Its not like we are talking about the greatest ever being dominated by some #10 ranked player in the world because at that point its just not really relevant. We are talking about a 24 year old thats on the brink of a historical achievement. He also has more slams at his age then Fed did. To me the greatest player ever shold undoubtable be the best player during his era and if Nadal beats Federer on sunday, on a hardcourt and to complete the career grand slam im not sure you really can say that Federer has without a doubt been better then Nadal during this last 5-6 years.
A Nadal win would make the H2H 15-7 for Nadal
That is a pretty decisive advantage.
No because he has zero slams.
When the player in question has won as many slams as Rafa at such a young age, then the H2H against the "greatest ever" does raise a huge debate. If Federer was the greatest ever I just dont think he would be so utterly dominated by someone who has a chance at going down in the record books at the best ever. Like I said earlier, H2H is only really relevant when you are talking about two greats (people like joker, murray, soderling) dont matter because they have nothing close to the accomplishments of Nadal.
TC, Who do you like today? I would love to hear your leans or plays.
HAHA based on what exactly?
Nadal beat Federer when Fed was 23 years old and it was on a hardcourt and the very first time they ever played. Then when they played the next season (fed now 24) Nadal won. Then the following season when Fed was 25, Nadal won 4 of the 5 matchs played that season. So explain to me exactly how Fed would beat him every match if they were both 24 when we have actual proof that he didnt and Rafa is a more established player these days (last few years) then he was back in 2004, 2005, 2006.
Federer was in his prime and he wasnt beating Nadal as casually as you make it sound. What years exactly do you consider Federer's prime? What you think Federer had never played a lefty in his career before he met up against Nadal? This argument is totally bunk seeing we have ACTUAL evidence of these two playing against each other when in Fed's prime and sorry but he wasnt dominating Rafa, it was actually maybe the opposite.
Sorry but the game of tennis is alot more then just serve or game.
What about mental strength, big match ability, fitness and carvascular, defence. Nadal has him beat in almost all these areas'.
First of all, Nadal went from being hurt and down to being back, being faster then before, stronger then before..going from serving 115 to 130??? REALLY? If Nadal is not been using HGH, i don't know who ever has!!
Second of all that 14-7 edge he has over Fed is been mostly matches on clay and not on hard courts..in fact 0 matches head to head on US Soil sense 2005. Nadal's camp makes sure Nadal dodges Fed in "bad situations". Nadal had a very smart camp. He is just not who people think he is and i really hope for tennis' sake that Nadal doesn't win it this year, because that would just be a shame.
i 100% agree. People are just looking for reasons why Federer isnt the greatest instead of finding reasons why he IS the greatest. His consistency (aside from the last grandslam) in grandslams is historic, all those consecutive grandslam semis in a row is epic. His records are amazing... Just because he is losing h2h against nadal shouldnt discount all the masterful things hes done overall. No one is perfect but until Nadal hits within 2 grand slams of Fed, Nadal cannot be the greatest.
Saying that though, im a huge fan of both but i do think Nadal is going to win the US Open this year, Feds back doesnt look right.
Another great point... Federer (according to Gilbert and other experts) have mentioned that he is probably the 2nd best clay courter in history even though he has only won once. Nadal is clearly hands down the greatest clay courter and beat Fed in all those French Open championships, w/o nadal there who knows how many more french opens fed would have. He could be the 2nd best clay courter of all time but since he only has 1, hard to put him there.
I love both players like i said but no way Federer will dominate Nadal 3-0. It will be a close match and i think Nadal will win.
Should be another legendary battle if both play at their best.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
