Will Nadal pass Federer?

[Ricardo]

This further proves what players believe, which is very different to what forum warriors here think. H-H isn't a key factor, and is only significant when there is nothing else to separate them. Players are after titles, first and foremost, than worrying about if his H-H against somebody will be bad for whatever twisted reason that forum warriors here like to believe.

Lets say Roger really cares, he'd easily just throw matches away on clay as he knows and admitted that Rafa is the best there. Knowing he really has small chance, he went on to make finals after finals losing to Rafa, surely he thinks H-H should be secondary to other things (commitment to winning matches to his best ability, call it professional requirement). Otherwise, he can always do a Kyrgios

 

[Moxie]

by saying this you have agreed to the argument that clay has skewed it all, because Fed is very good on it. If he sucked on clay like Sampras, he would have winning H2H in finals majors and finals overall, because as we know it Sampras never made it to a RG final while Rafa beat Fed 4 times there, not to mention a whole bunch of clay Masters1000 finals.

A Federer with bad clay ability would have 18 GS, and a winning H-H over Nadal......whether it's overall, in Major or Masters finals. It doesn't take any effort to have it look good for Roger, all it takes is for him to be crap on clay......which i am sure he would be capable of, if he really wanted to look good H-H vs Nadal.....sorry you can't win this argument.

I take all of your points, and I still win the H2H argument. There hardly is one.

 

[Moxie]

This further proves what players believe, which is very different to what forum warriors here think. H-H isn't a key factor, and is only significant when there is nothing else to separate them. Players are after titles, first and foremost, than worrying about if his H-H against somebody will be bad for whatever twisted reason that forum warriors here like to believe.

Lets say Roger really cares, he'd easily just throw matches away on clay as he knows and admitted that Rafa is the best there. Knowing he really has small chance, he went on to make finals after finals losing to Rafa, surely he thinks H-H should be secondary to other things (commitment to winning matches to his best ability, call it professional requirement). Otherwise, he can always do a Kyrgios

I'll agree with this. Any notion that Roger would ever have thrown a match for the H2H is bollocks. He's always believed in himself.

 

[Ricardo]

I take all of your points, and I still win the H2H argument. There hardly is one.

i said it before that Rafa is the better of the two because of the H-H but Fed is better overall, so what argument have you won?

if anything, my claim that if Fed chose to, he would be perfectly capable of having a winning H-H vs Rafa....now try and win this one.

 

[Moxie]

i said it before that Rafa is the better of the two because of the H-H but Fed is better overall, so what argument have you won?

if anything, my claim that if Fed chose to, he would be perfectly capable of having a winning H-H vs Rafa....now try and win this one.

I think we agree. Except in the notion that Roger could choose to beat Rafa. He fought to play him, and good for him, despite the odds, in some of the tournaments. I don't think Fed would ever have tanked to not play Nadal. If you think so, then I guess you "win."

 

[Ricardo]

I think we agree. Except in the notion that Roger could choose to beat Rafa. He fought to play him, and good for him, despite the odds, in some of the tournaments. I don't think Fed would ever have tanked to not play Nadal. If you think so, then I guess you "win."

Put simply, it's up to Fed to decide whether he wanted winning H-H vs Rafa. It's on his racquet not Rafa, as all it takes is to not play Rafa on clay. Fact hard to swallow no?

 

[Moxie]

Put simply, it's up to Fed to decide whether he wanted winning H-H vs Rafa. It's on his racquet not Rafa, as all it takes is to not play Rafa on clay. Fact hard to swallow no?

The notion that everything is on Roger's racquet is just not completely true, especially vis-a-vis Rafa, though it's a lovely fantasy. You're saying if he'd only not played Rafa on clay. Or, presumably, as much. What's that about? I asked you before: would you have Roger tank before he meets him? What kind of champion is that? I do remember there was much hand-wringing in the Fed camp in 2011 FO semis. Folks were hoping that Roger would lose to Djokovic, or even tank, so that Novak could face Nadal, not Federer, thinking that Djokovic had the better chance. But Roger fancied his own chances. That's at least one difference between a real champion and internet folks second-guessing, I'd say. He didn't win, but he preferred his own chances.

 

[Ricardo]

The notion that everything is on Roger's racquet is just not completely true, especially vis-a-vis Rafa, though it's a lovely fantasy. You're saying if he'd only not played Rafa on clay. Or, presumably, as much. What's that about? I asked you before: would you have Roger tank before he meets him? What kind of champion is that? I do remember there was much hand-wringing in the Fed camp in 2011 FO semis. Folks were hoping that Roger would lose to Djokovic, or even tank, so that Novak could face Nadal, not Federer, thinking that Djokovic had the better chance. But Roger fancied his own chances. That's at least one difference between a real champion and internet folks second-guessing, I'd say. He didn't win, but he preferred his own chances.

It is on his racquet in this case, as he was in a position to choose whether he wanted to play Nadal or not on clay. He played Nadal on grass and hard court and had slightly winning H-H, so it all comes down to if he would play Nadal or not.....to decide whether or not he keeps the H-H advantage. Of course, he did the right thing and never avoided to challenge the best ever on clay. Yet this is now used heavily by forum warrior like you to downgrade his legacy.

Just saying, if Fed wanted to win argument about H-H, he would keep his grass and hard court and avoid Rafa on clay at all costs. He knows full well that beating Nadal on clay is unlikely, despite what he said before a match.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yeah, we've already concluded that. Any problems with having to adhere to the rules and he just has the guy banned from umpiring him lol. Smart alright. Despicable that they allow it though. Wouldn't happen in any other sport.

It's happened in football (soccer), boxing and MMA to name a few. Not saying Nadal's behavior wasn't uncalled for, but don't act like it's some scandal.

 

[Front242]

It's happened in football (soccer), boxing and MMA to name a few. Not saying Nadal's behavior wasn't uncalled for, but don't act like it's some scandal.

Fair enough. I barely watch anything except tennis these days (used to watch UFC a lot years ago though - more a fan of heavyweights than the skinny wimps fighting these days. Give me Randy Couture or Fedor Emelianenko any day over Connor McGregor) so I'll admit my statement wasn't backed by a huge sample.

 

[Moxie]

It is on his racquet in this case, as he was in a position to choose whether he wanted to play Nadal or not on clay. He played Nadal on grass and hard court and had slightly winning H-H, so it all comes down to if he would play Nadal or not.....to decide whether or not he keeps the H-H advantage. Of course, he did the right thing and never avoided to challenge the best ever on clay. Yet this is now used heavily by forum warrior like you to downgrade his legacy.

Just saying, if Fed wanted to win argument about H-H, he would keep his grass and hard court and avoid Rafa on clay at all costs. He knows full well that beating Nadal on clay is unlikely, despite what he said before a match.

You seem to have forgotten that he did, in fact, skip the whole clay season, avoiding Rafa just as you suggest.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

38 pages ...Have you guys decided yet?

 

[Front242]

You seem to have forgotten that he did, in fact, skip the whole clay season, avoiding Rafa just as you suggest.

That's a hardcore Nadal fan's view on why he skipped clay season. The REAL reason he skipped clay season had nothing to do with head to head with Nadal, it was firstly to not veer from his aggressive game plan of well placed/big serve and one/two combo of serve/winner and not get involved in baseline rallies and in doing so also keep him fresher for Wimbledon and the rest of the season and prevent injury. Of course the clown screwed that up by playing Montreal on an ego trip but the above is why he skipped the whole clay season and he'll probably do it next year too.

 

[Moxie]

That's a hardcore Nadal fan's view on why he skipped clay season. The REAL reason he skipped clay season had nothing to do with head to head with Nadal, it was firstly to not veer from his aggressive game plan of well placed/big serve and one/two combo of serve/winner and not get involved in baseline rallies and in doing so also keep him fresher for Wimbledon and the rest of the season and prevent injury. Of course the clown screwed that up by playing Montreal on an ego trip but the above is why he skipped the whole clay season and he'll probably do it next year too.

Oh, come on. I was responding to Ricardo's idea that it's "on Roger's racquet" to control the H2H by avoiding Nadal on clay. (Some bit of self-delusion to claim avoidance as being the aggressor's stance, but whatever.) I know he was skipping it to try to avoid injury.

 

[Front242]

Oh, come on. I was responding to Ricardo's idea that it's "on Roger's racquet" to control the H2H by avoiding Nadal on clay. (Some bit of self-delusion to claim avoidance as being the aggressor's stance, but whatever.) I know he was skipping it to try to avoid injury.

Thought as much but just wasn't sure as I've read tons of Nadal fans claiming he skipped clay season to protect his h2h which is frankly moronic and I don't consider you a moron at all. Far from it

 

[Front242]

I'll be disappointed if Roger never plays on clay again but it's not impossible to see him never play there again aside from maybe Monte Caro for the sake of trying to bag it for once. He had 2 good chances to do so, once against Nadal which he made a royal mess of having 5-3 lead in set 1 and lost it 7-5 and then 4-0 lead in set 2 and lost that too 7-5 and second time round against Wawrinka.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I'll be disappointed if Roger never plays on clay again but it's not impossible to see him never play there again aside from maybe Monte Caro for the sake of trying to bag it for once. He had 2 good chances to do so, once against Nadal which he made a royal mess of having 5-3 lead in set 1 and lost it 7-5 and then 4-0 lead in set 2 and lost that too 7-5 and second time round against Wawrinka.

Well, he is lacking both MC and Rome. I am hoping next year, he will do a minimal clay schedule, say just Rome and RG. He can try MC some other time when being fresh for Wimbledon becomes no longer important. He can skip Miami in view of minimal clay schedule. He should skip Canada forever.

 

[Jelenafan]

. He can try MC some other time when being fresh for Wimbledon becomes no longer important.

Per that criteria I wouldn't be surprised if Federer never plays MC again.

 

[Moxie]

Per that criteria I wouldn't be surprised if Federer never plays MC again.

Well said. When would Federer stop prioritizing Wimbledon? Personally, I believe he thinks the ship has sailed on MC and Rome, and I doubt that keeps him up at night.

 

[Moxie]

Thought as much but just wasn't sure as I've read tons of Nadal fans claiming he skipped clay season to protect his h2h which is frankly moronic and I don't consider you a moron at all. Far from it

Thanks, doll! I actually find it surprising that any fan of Roger would think that he'd avoid Rafa to protect his H2H. Or, for that matter, Rafa avoiding Novak for the same reason. This is a fan's take, but not a champion's mentality. Players like Roger, Rafa, Novak and even Andy didn't get where they are by not believing in themselves. I'm absolutely sure they'd rather go up against their toughest opponent on their worst day, than concede a round early and protect a stat. You don't win multiple Majors thinking like that.