Rafa's Wimbledon record since his last win there. (A = Absent)
F, 2R, 1R, 4R, 2R, A, 4R
Tennis 2018
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Rafa's Wimbledon record since his last win there. (A = Absent)
F, 2R, 1R, 4R, 2R, A, 4R
Pretty shocking that.
@saivet I meant if they had faced each other more often at Wimbledon rather than creating more events on grass.
Nadal on Clay is the most incredible sporting dominance of all time surely? I think Federer is the GOAT but Nadal on clay is astonishing.
I mean he's made 5 Wimbledon finals which I think is a good achievement in itself. Federer made 5 French Open finals too.
They've met 3 times at Wimbledon and 5 times at Roland Garros.
Now has me thinking which two players have faced each other the most at one slam?
Good question. I've got no idea.
5 wimbledon finals is an excellent record of course. It's a weird record he has though, to get to 5 finals in a row and then never get close to it again. Did people just work him out on grass or something?
He was already world number one for two years and had won six opens before nadal was 20, much less djokovic who came into his peak much later.
Federer was 24-26 before nadal rose to prominence whereas nadal has had to contend with federer since he was a teen and then djokovic at his peak.
Conversely, Federer has been beating Nadal while Fed is 35-36 years of age, which is well beyond when most players are retired, much less winning slams while playing at a top level. Therefore, if you penalize Federer for being good when Nadal was very young then you have to likewise penalize Nadal for not being able to beat an aging Federer.
That is reflected in Nadal's trophies though so he is already being penalized for it. If nadal had beaten federer in the last two years whenever they met, we wouldnt even be having this discussion. So why penalize him twice for it?
Nadal was a better player than Fed was as a teenager, so he isn't really lagging him that much in terms of when they won their first slams. Nadal won his first slam at roughly 19 while Federer, despite being 5 years older won his first at 21. Therefore there really isn't much in terms of crossover for both players given the disparity in when they emerged as slam winners.
Stephens getting her knickers in a twist at the presser.
Since Nadal won his first Slam, he leads Federer on Slams. Since Djoko won his first, he leads the field on Slams. Federer went 4.5 years without a slam until Djoko and Murray disappeared in 2017.
Federer's early final wins against the likes of Phillipousis, Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Roddick, ancient Agassi, Bagdatis, Roddick, Gonzalez were some really tough ones. He'll go down as GOAT maybe but he's had a great time in a poor field and that's a luxury neither Nadal nor Djoko were afforded. It's a pity really because the both of them at their best in that sort of field would have really cleaned up as well. I mean these guys have won 2 and 3 Slams a year with all the Top 4 active and well.
If Rafa wasn't fit for Clay, Federer would ditch that holiday of his and most definitely turn up for one warmup tourney and play RG. He knows his only chance is when Nadal isn't around. I don't get this resting his body stuff really because he plays a packed schedule when it suits him. He even played some trash 250 like Rotterdam only to secure his #1 ranking. Playing such a tournament doesn't seem the type of thing someone at 37 would do right when he's won AO and played 2 1000 Masters?
This wasn't the debate. I said he's GOAT so how hasn't he been able to figure out a way? For the GOAT to be routinely embarrassed on clay is pretty poor. And it's not like Roger is a poor clay player, he's grown up playing on clay and is very accomplished and has beaten Rafa on clay. One would think it would be far easier for RF to win at RG than for Nadal to beat Federer at Wimbledon considering how little Nadal had ever played on grass before 2006.
Djoko's had the worst luck of them all. He's had to deal with both Fed and Rafa and to still be on 12 Slams is incredible. He's also had by far the toughest Slam final opponents of the trio. He's also the only one who's actually rattled Nadal at RG and that's something no one else has managed.
Federer has no reason to do that since he is well beyond retirement age and wants to spend more time with his family. He will simply play in the tournaments he wants to play in from here on out.
Sure. I guess that family time could be skipped when the #1 ranking was on the line. Everyone was expecting Fed to turn up for one wamrup and then the RG this time because Nadal's fitness was in a little doubt. If Rafa was out, he'd have definitely turned up for RG. He plays all sorts of post USO tournaments in Asia, he'd definitely turn up for a Slam he'd be favorite at with Rafa out.
Everyone was expecting Fed to turn up for one wamrup and then the RG this time because Nadal's fitness was in a little doubt. If Rafa was out, he'd have definitely turned up for RG. He plays all sorts of post USO tournaments in Asia, he'd definitely turn up for a Slam he'd be favorite at with Rafa out.
The guy is 37, is widely considered the GOAT and has already won everything worth winning, including 3 of the past 6 slams (again at the age of 36/37). What more is left at this point. Nadal on the other hand is still 32, which is a reasonable age to keep a 100% tour schedule.
Last edited:
The point is, he doesn't need a 100% clay season. With how poor the field is, he can turn up for one warmup and then head to RG still probably as 2nd favorite. If Nadal doesn't play, Federer turns up for the clay season. At his age, he's still handling a pretty full schedule outside of clay. I'm sure he'd swap Beijing and Basel for a shot at Roland Garros (if it were achieveble).
I don't think RG is achievable for Roger at this point whether Rafa is there or not. The likes of Thiem and others would prove too much for Roger at this stage.
Thiem is probably just about the only one who would beat him on clay even now (and that's no guarantee). All he would need is a good draw and to avoid the likes of Djoko and Thiem and it is very achievable given the high level he's playing at.
But that wasnt reflected in his trophies, he won his first non-french open slam in 2008 because he was up against federer at his peak. Whereas federer had it easier after winning his first slam, he also did not have to contest with a peak djokovic when he was a bit older.
Yeah for the short while when he was good, he was really the best in the world in probably the toughest era. A shame he couldnt keep it up.
Djokovic also had to deal with peak Murray as well.
The period where Fed won most of his slams was because he was so dominant. Tiger Woods referred to him as the most dominant figure in sports at the time. His success was down to his own dominance. The same applies to Rafa when he finally broke through circa 2008 and went on his own run, and likewise with Djokovic a couple years later. Each of these players won as much as they did because they imposed their dominance on Tennis during those stretches.
Ofcourse all 3 exerted their dominance on the field but two of them had to impose their dominance on a really strong field and one didn't. Having to dominate a field (if you're Novak) that includes Federer, Nadal and then the likes of Murray and Del Potro etc is unbelievably difficult as compared to utterly dominating a field where you're up against umm, one serve Roddick and Hewitt?
Nadal broke that dominance when federer was at his peak,from 2003 to 2007 he won 9 slams against the likes of philippoussis, hewitt, baghdatis, gonazalez, hewitt and roddick.
You dont need to be dominant to beat them lot and the current nadal could have beaten majority of those opponents too. Look at the people nadal/djokovic beat to win their titles and the ones federer beat, there is a huge difference.
Those two and safin were the better players out of them lot. Says it all really.
I don't think Del Potro or Murray were why Rafa fell off the map at Wimbledon after 2011. Both of the latter were randomly inconsistent during that period.
You forgot Nadal. Rafa was also playing very well during Fed's peak years and beat him fairly often back then. So in essence, peak Federer had to deal with a nearly peak Nadal, not just Roddick, Hewitt et al.
Last edited:
Anyway can't really fault Federer for the good fortune of being born 5 years earlier. If Novak/Rafa were born 5 years earlier they'd probably be on 20 Slams and we'd have similar discussions about them. You beat who's in front of you and unfortunately for Nadal, Djoko and Murray, it's been a tougher path to Slam success.
Rafa fell off because his body just can't handle back to back clay and grass seasons as he started to get older. Young Rafa could still handle the strain on the knees but beyond a point, it got difficult. He's also had a lot of injuries post 2012 ish as well. I don't expect him to go beyond R4 this time either. He doesn't even bother with Queens and stuff anymore as he just can't handle the strain of Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome, Madrid, Paris and then straight off to Queens to practice. His knees are too dodgy for that. He's done well to recover over the summer and do well at the USO.
The best part about reality is that thought experiments are just that - figments of our imagination that have no legitimacy when compared to things that have actually happened.
Last edited:
Nadal was what 17/18 then? He was a very good french open player but not much more. Before 2008, I think he only got to two wimbledon finals from memory and was a very poor hard court player. This time period is when federer accumulated almost half his grand slam totals too.
Yes, he was 17 when he first faced Roger (who was already number 1 then) in 2004. Rafa won that the next 6 out of 7 meetings with Roger, which suggests he was already on par with him in many ways since the very beginning. He just seemed to bloom earlier where as Fed has maintained longer (#1 ranking at age 36/37)
On clay though, like I said other than clay his record was pretty poor. Took until 2008 for him to seriously compete on other surfaces, he was a clay prodigy.
Everyone was expecting Fed to turn up for one wamrup and then the RG this time because Nadal's fitness was in a little doubt. If Rafa was out, he'd have definitely turned up for RG. He plays all sorts of post USO tournaments in Asia, he'd definitely turn up for a Slam he'd be favorite at with Rafa out.
The hate is just dripping...
He played Rotterdam and skipped Dubai, so his schedule was identical to last year. You don’t need to invent hypotheticals. The fact is both him and his trainer have stated multiple times that playing on clay most likely contributed to his long time out in 2016 and at his age there’s no sense to risk a similar injury especially given how close the FO and Wimbledon are.
Fed doesn't even have to play another tournament he cemented his GOAT position 2 years ago at the AO. Every slam he's winning now is just a bonus on top of his legacy, quite incredible he's doing it at this age too not sure any other tennis player has done it so late in their career.
Rafa has been routinely embarassed by players ranked well below him on grass. Federer hasn't had that sort of issues. All this nonsense of how Rafa would blitz the field but for Federer and Djokovic would hold water if he weren't routinely dumped out of the likes of Wimbledon in the earlier rounds. Federer, once he hit his stride, has hardly ever had "upsets" in the majors.
Moreover, none over here are disputing that Rafa is the best clay court player of all time. Does not mean he is the GOAT. Also only because Fed is considered the GOAT does not mean he has Rafa's number on clay. Rafa is an absolutely brilliant player and were it not for Federer he could have legitimately claimed to he the GOAT. So Federer struggling against Nadal on clay isn't really as shameful as you are trying to imply to prop him up.
Grass season is finally upon us. 
Grass season is finally upon us.
Long overdue. It's time to cut the clay season and add one more week of grass (including a masters tournament).
Fed will start tomorrow against the older Zverev who plays at home turf and likes to S&V. Fed should take care of business.
Fed down a set to M Zverev. He's a bit rusty but seems to have settled in now in the 2nd.
Fed takes the 2nd set, anything can happen in the 3rd I feel.
Edit. Takes the 3rd relatively easily as well. Still a bit rusty but a decent return after his break.
Edit. Takes the 3rd relatively easily as well. Still a bit rusty but a decent return after his break.
Last edited:
Shaky first match on the return to action, but Fed got the job done. Had many easy holds, but also many games where he had to fight break points. Overall, a good first match.
- Status