Federer vs. Nadal

[Roy Hobbs]

Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer for the third straight time in a Grand Slam final.  It's clear to everyone that these are by far the two best players on the planet, and that right now, Nadal is the better of the two.

We've heard for years that Federer is the best player in tennis history, and his 13 Grand Slam wins go a long way towards supporting that.  However, I had argued that Federer's greatness couldn't be proved because he didn't have a true rival to test him.  Now, he does, and that rival is surpassing him.

My question, then, is what does the recent dominance by Nadal do to Federer's legacy?  Was he the best player in a weak era?  Or is he still truly "the best ever"?  If he's the best, where does that put Nadal on the hierarchy?

[celticmaestro]

I think when his career is over, Federer will be the best ever.It's no shame losing to Nadal, but I firmly believe that he'll be back to his best soon enough. If he finally wins the French Open then then these three defeats will be forgotten.

As for the match itself, just fantastic. The duels that these guys have are always epic - Wimbledon last year for one - and I can't wait for the next one.

[SShorefan 3.0]

I flat out love watching these two compete.  I think Nadal is on the verge of being the man for a quite a while.

[BrickJames]

This is like the Kobe/Lebron debate.

Federer is the smarter, more skilled player.

Nadal is the stronger, more athletic.

[yall hate]

Federer is the best ever.  But people dont remain the best throughout their career. Nadal is also amazing, but the surface they are playing on makes such a difference.

i look at the two of them like tiger woods and phil mickelson.  a few years back, it looked like Phil had finally turned the corner and was going to consistently challenge Tiger.  But everyone knew Tiger was the greatest. 

[Moranis]

Too bad they aren't the same age.  Can you imagine what this could have been if Federer wasn't like 5 years older than Nadal?

Right now I still think Federer is the best ever, though I could easily see Nadal pass him by.  Nadal now has won a grand slam on all three surfaces.  Federer hasn't done that and Sampras didn't do that.  Nadal needs to continue his growth, but would anyone be surprised if Nadal didn't defend his titles at the French and Wimbeldon and then close the year by winning the US Open?  I know I wouldn't.  In fact I would be surprised if he didn't win at least two more Grand Slams this year (on a side note how funny would it be if Federer won the French and Nadal won the other three, you know essentially they switched places).

[BudweiserCeltic]

Federer is the best ever.  But people dont remain the best throughout their career. Nadal is also amazing, but the surface they are playing on makes such a difference.

i look at the two of them like tiger woods and phil mickelson.  a few years back, it looked like Phil had finally turned the corner and was going to consistently challenge Tiger.  But everyone knew Tiger was the greatest. 

Do you have a break down of their matches by types of court? Because beating him 5 of 7 times in Grandslam Finals, and winning 13 of their 19 overall matches hardly seems to be a case of the surface. Sure one has the advantage over the other depending on the surface, but Nadal winning that many times against Federer seems to make that argument inconsequential as far as I'm concerned. I due wonder about a breakdown in their matches in each type of surface though.

[EatSleepBreatheGreen]

First off let me say this. I was never a fan of tennis, until Federer showed up. I never actually watched a match in the wee hours of the morning in the US, until Nadal showed up. I think Federer is the classic, has all the intangibles and skill. Meanwhile Nadal is the flashy, athletic, younger, endorsement cash cow.(with skills to back it up, though)

Federer is the best ever. Its not his fault he was head and shoulders above everyone else for a long period. Look at Michael Jordan. However, I think right now, Nadal IS the best. Nadal is younger, and I also think he is going to be on top for a while. At the end of both careers we'll be able to comment on who is the best ever.

Federer has every shot imaginable in tennis. He can place the ball in places people can't reach or arent fast enough to get to. That is, until Nadal showed up. Nadal's skill set is very close, but what pushes him over the top is definitely his speed. He can get to the spots where Federer places the ball, and I think he's also starting to get in Federer's head. I think it psyched Fed(sorry started getting tired of typin the whole thing), when at the Australian open they were coming through the tunnel, Nadal was right behind him. He probably felt him breathing on his neck. lol

[Redz]

Their Wimbledon final was the first match I've found myself unable to turn away from in years.  McEnroe/Borg like.

[yall hate]

Federer is the best ever.  But people dont remain the best throughout their career. Nadal is also amazing, but the surface they are playing on makes such a difference.

i look at the two of them like tiger woods and phil mickelson.  a few years back, it looked like Phil had finally turned the corner and was going to consistently challenge Tiger.  But everyone knew Tiger was the greatest. 

Do you have a break down of their matches by types of court? Because beating him 5 of 7 times in Grandslam Finals, and winning 13 of their 19 overall matches hardly seems to be a case of the surface. Sure one has the advantage over the other depending on the surface, but Nadal winning that many times against Federer seems to make that argument inconsequential as far as I'm concerned. I due wonder about a breakdown in their matches in each type of surface though.

I guess it isnt as pronounced as I believed (against each other.  Each is clearly significantly more dominant on 'their surface' over the rest of tennis.  nadal on Clay, federor on everything else).

    * All Matches: Nadal 13-6

By surface:

    * Hard courts: Even 3-3
    * Clay courts: Nadal 9-1
    * Grass courts: Federer 2-1
    * Carpet courts: Even 0-0

By tournament category:

    * Grand Slam Finals: Nadal 5-2
    * Grand Slam Matches (all): Nadal 6-2
    * All Tennis Masters Series events: Nadal 6-4
    * Tennis Masters Cup: Federer 2-0

By tournament round encounter:

    * All Finals: Nadal 11-4
    * All Non-Finals: Even 2-2

[BrickJames]

First off let me say this. I was never a fan of tennis, until Federer showed up. I never actually watched a match in the wee hours of the morning in the US, until Nadal showed up. I think Federer is the classic, has all the intangibles and skill. Meanwhile Nadal is the flashy, athletic, younger, endorsement cash cow.(with skills to back it up, though)

Federer is the best ever. Its not his fault he was head and shoulders above everyone else for a long period. Look at Michael Jordan. However, I think right now, Nadal IS the best. Nadal is younger, and I also think he is going to be on top for a while. At the end of both careers we'll be able to comment on who is the best ever.

Federer has every shot imaginable in tennis. He can place the ball in places people can't reach or arent fast enough to get to. That is, until Nadal showed up. Nadal's skill set is very close, but what pushes him over the top is definitely his speed. He can get to the spots where Federer places the ball, and I think he's also starting to get in Federer's head. I think it psyched Fed(sorry started getting tired of typin the whole thing), when at the Australian open they were coming through the tunnel, Nadal was right behind him. He probably felt him breathing on his neck. lol

Completely agree, and I'm pretty much in the same boat.  Federer made me appreciate the sport as well.

I like Federer better because of his skills, but each one of his matchups vs. Nadal is almost epic.  Nadal certainly has the edge due to his athleticism, but their last matchup (I forget which "Open" just happened) I was impressed by Nadal's ability not only to chance down's Fed's shots, but also to kite Fed from one edge of the court to another with incredibly accurate forehands in the opposite corners.

This might be my favorite rivalry in all of sports right now.  It's great to watch.

[cordobes]

Federer had competition, he just dominated them. Probably the same Nadal is going to do for a few years now. I think we need more distance to know if any of them is the true best ever. It's still way to early to put Nadal in this conversation. If they keep the trend to slow down the game, he has a shot. Otherwise, more skilled and offensive players won't allow him achieve that kind of status.

Anyway, this rivalry is starting to bore me. I genuinely hate baseliners, even somewhat aggressive ones like Nadal, and I never liked Federer's opportunistic playing style. Funny, Federer is tasting his own medicine; when he nows plays Nadal, he clearly becomes intimidated when he gets passed a couple of times and resorts to play counter-punching, severely diminishing his chances of winning the match. Anyway, I can't wait to see the Joker, Murray, del Potro or whoever running these guys out of the circuit.

[Moranis]

Federer ended Nadal's win steak on clay by winning the final of the Madrid Open 6-4, 6-4 just in time for the start of the French Open.  It is the first time in 2 years Federer has beaten Nadal in the final of an event and only his second win on clay over Nadal ever.

[ben]

Sampras > Nadal > Federer

[Moranis]

2 more wins needed by Federer and the two guys that posed his biggest obstacle have both lost.  It would be slightly amusing if he wins the French to tie Sampras, given that neither he nor Sampras has ever won the French.