Federer's recent comments once again illustrate why Nadal owned him on clay.....

[Billie]

Rafa owned Nole on clay, particularly and still in Paris 6:1 I think. Everywhere else on clay they are close now in their H2H. Rafa has 9 titles there and 5 everywhere else. Nole has 0 RG titles but 11 everywhere else, and hopefully counting. Also Rafa never had a winning streak over Nole like Nole has had over Rafa twice now. You can spin it any way you want but those are the facts. And Nole has dominated the field more than Rafa ever did, clay aside. Nobody disputes his dominance on clay and especially RG, but that does not make the whole ATP/ITF calendar; therefore more Masters titles and majors almost everywhere else for Nole, as well as more weeks as #1. I am not even sure what you are arguing about.

And we are talking about a player who is 1 year younger than Rafa, not 10 for god's sake and who started playing professionally in 2003 with a lot of miles in his legs and different kinds of challenges in his life and career.

 

[Tennis Fan]

TF, thanks for the article, and the video is so interesting, in that Rafa says his favorite AO match was his losing one to Novak. Because he felt he'd made strides. That may prove to be the case in his losing effort to Novak last week. Fingers crossed for RG.

I'm also a woman on the boards, so I get the same. It's probably because you have Rafa as your avatar, so we "see" you as a man. But glad to know we have another woman in the conversation.

I'm just glad to see Rafa competing well again. That match they just played had some interesting implications. For one, Novak was visibly agitated that Rafa came to play and wasn't going away. That had to give Rafa supreme confidence for RG. Rafa's recent results shows that his head is back in the game, win or lose, I'm always Team Rafa. The way he plays the game, respects his peers, ball boys, and the fans outweighs the number of matches, titles, or accolades he receives to me. He's a great guy, that's why I support him. The record books will take care of itself.

 

[Moxie]

Rafa owned Nole on clay, particularly and still in Paris 6:1 I think. Everywhere else on clay they are close now in their H2H. Rafa has 9 titles there and 5 everywhere else. Nole has 0 RG titles but 11 everywhere else, and hopefully counting. Also Rafa never had a winning streak over Nole like Nole has had over Rafa twice now. You can spin it any way you want but those are the facts. And Nole has dominated the field more than Rafa ever did, clay aside. Nobody disputes his dominance on clay and especially RG, but that does not make the whole ATP/ITF calendar; therefore more Masters titles and majors almost everywhere else for Nole, as well as more weeks as #1. I am not even sure what you are arguing about.

And we are talking about a player who is 1 year younger than Rafa, not 10 for god's sake and who started playing professionally in 2003 with a lot of miles in his legs and different kinds of challenges in his life and career.

You didn't quote a post, but by "you," I'm guessing you mean me. I guess we're all sharpening our elbows for the "where do they stand in relation to each other: Fed/Rafa/Djoker?" conversation. Which will be never-ending. I thought you were above sneering at Rafa's # of majors on clay, but I guess not. And he has won at all 4. It is not correct to say that Rafa never dominated the field the way Nole has, or "ways" may differ, but dominance is dominance. He had a winning h2h against all of the Big 4 as long as there was one until last fall. And had a winning h2h against almost all the top players for a long period of time. He also owned the MS record for some years until Novak passed him a few months ago. Even then, Rafa tied it again at MC before Novak got one more on him at Madrid. Sure, he's running away with weeks at #1 and the points, now. But it does matter in what context you do all of your winning and record-breaking. All three of the future Hall-of-Famers are very fine players. I think it's wrong of those who seem to be trying to shove Nadal out of the conversation, or relegate him back to a dirt-baller.

 

[Federberg]

^I agree that Rafa's place in the pantheon is secure Moxie. But I will add that I do find Novak's dominance extremely impressive. If their slam numbers end up matching it would be hard not to give Novak the edge. It's actually the reason I personally have difficulty relegating the Pistol right now. Yes winning all 4 slams is impressive, but can we honestly say, if you take each individually that one is more important than another? For me, no. Dominance would be a more impressive nuance. But its individual taste

 

[Moxie]

^I agree that Rafa's place in the pantheon is secure Moxie. But I will add that I do find Novak's dominance extremely impressive. If their slam numbers end up matching it would be hard not to give Novak the edge. It's actually the reason I personally have difficulty relegating the Pistol right now. Yes winning all 4 slams is impressive, but can we honestly say, if you take each individually that one is more important than another? For me, no. Dominance would be a more impressive nuance. But its individual taste

I agree that Djokovic's level of play over the last couple of years in particular has been extremely impressive, even if you leave off dominance, and by that I mean to compliment the level of play, not to discount his dominance over the tour. However, yes, I do think "dominance" as a factor between players is a matter of taste. (It's rather a guy-thing, judging by years on sports forums, if you'll allow me that.) But, as you say, when judging, for example, Pete v. Rafa, both with 14, you do get into the fine points, and personal preferences are going to weight people's choices. I completely agree with you that, taken individually, each Major win has the same weight, which is why I get so tired of people trying to make less of Rafa's 14 because so much was won at RG. As I was trying to describe in earlier posts on this thread, I think you can describe dominance in a few different ways, too. Look at the quality of opponent that Nadal has had to beat to get nearly all of his Major wins. No one has beaten Roger more in major finals, nor Novak in major finals, and all of those in their prime years.

Obviously, no one can take away Nadal's place in the pantheon, but I'm defending it because some folks seem to be trying to shove him out of the conversation. For all the years we Rafa fans had to hear the variations on "17 > 14," suddenly 14 doesn't necessarily seem to be better than 11. (And I don't mean you.) I'm just sticking up for my guy.