Federer is staying healthy for a reason
He is the best allaround player with superior technique, movement and vision
Nadal on the other hand is raping his opponents with pure force(he improved his allaroundplay tremendously as well tho) which obv is very hard on his body
Playing a style which assures that you can stay healthy and on top of your game for a very long time IS skill
Federer is staying healthy for a reason
He is the best allaround player with superior technique, movement and vision
Nadal on the other hand is raping his opponents with pure force(he improved his allaroundplay tremendously as well tho) which obv is very hard on his body
Playing a style which assures that you can stay healthy and on top of your game for a very long time IS skill
If it wasn't apparent, I was pointing out the obvious flaws in the general thinking ITT. Of course health is a skill.
Federer made 23straight semis, Nadal's best is 5(active 3), Federer has 10straight finals(18/19), Nadal's best is 3(active) how the **** does Nadal have a better peak? Nadal only has 2 multislam years 08/10, Federer has 5: 04/05/06/07/09
Spanning 04-09 seems like a somewhat strange definition of peak.
Quote:
is it possible Nadal will have the higher peak? sure but he sure as **** needs another 3/4 year
Similarly, I'd say this is about better career than peak. But the general point that he's going to need at least another 2 and probably 3 years of performance comparable to this year is valid. I just happen to think he's capable of it.
EDIT: And regarding doping, it could well be true. I don't really care about that at all.
Nadal this year is arguably better than Federer any year.
Federer at his peak lost consistently to a non-peak Nadal.
I think those would be my arguments for Nadal better at his peak.
I agree with cashy that he should consider Federer's longevity into the equation. It is skill to be able to play at that high level without hurting your body as much as Nadal hurts his.
Nadal this year is arguably better than Federer any year.
Fed's 2005 and 2006 are probably the greatest years a male tennis player will ever have, and they are both much more impressive than Nadal's year this year.
Fed's 2005 and 2006 are probably the greatest years a male tennis player will ever have, and they are both much more impressive than Nadal's year this year.
2007 was really strong too, but he had lesser success in Masters events that year.
In 2006 he played in 17 tournaments, winning 12 of them and finishing runner-up in 4. His only non-final of the year was being beat by Andy Murray in Cincinnati. He went 92-5, his only losses to Murray once and Rafa 4 times (LOL).
2007 was really strong too, but he had lesser success in Masters events that year.
In 2006 he played in 17 tournaments, winning 12 of them and finishing runner-up in 4. His only non-final of the year was being beat by Andy Murray in Cincinnati. He went 92-5, his only losses to Murray once and Rafa 4 times (LOL).
he had a 94.2 win percentage over 3seasons, Nadal's best single year is 89%
Quote:
Spanning 04-09 seems like a somewhat strange definition of peak.
its 04-06/7, I mean its weird to call a 3slam year off peak but it really was a drop off from his previous 3yrs, his 4th best year is equivalent to Nadal's best think about that when talking about Nadal having a higher peak
Fed's 2005 and 2006 are probably the greatest years a male tennis player will ever have, and they are both much more impressive than Nadal's year this year.
Is this still true if we take the strength of the competition into account?
How do '10 Federer, Djokovic, Murray and Soderling stack up against '05 Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nadal? That's not obvious to me. All of those guys in the second group won majors, but then again with the exception of Safin all of them had their glory days before Federer's ascendance.
Yeah, bottomset, I agree with you that Federer 04-07 is probably a good representation of him at his best.
Pretty strong correlation to beating the **** out of everyone and then being considered "weaker".
Sure, that's a potential issue. But clearly everybody is doing that to some extent, because even given a resume like this
Quote:
William Tatem Tilden II (February 10, 1893 – June 5, 1953), nicknamed "Big Bill," is often considered one of the greatest tennis players of all time. An American tennis player who was the World No. 1 player for seven years, Bill Tilden dominated the world of international tennis in the first half of the 1920s. During his 18 year amateur period of 1912-30, he won 138 of 192 tournaments, and had a match record of 907-62, a winning percentage of 93.6 percent
I still think it's incredibly unlikely that anybody in this thread is going to get on the Bill Tilden for GOAT train.
I have no idea what a good answer to the competition question is. There's a fair bit of "LOL Roddick" in these parts, and Safin was obviously kind of a nutcase.
We will find out in this years Wimbledon if they meet
Level?
I'll assume it isn't and say that the result of that match, were it to happen wouldn't have an impact on this debate (excluding the possibility that it's the final)
with health issues you've gotta go w/ federer, who still has a few years to scoop some grand slams from nadal in his prime. nadal isn't going to have nearly the longevity federer did, when was the last time federer had any sort of injury issue that wasn't like jet lag or something?
fed has a creaky back now. it doesn't seem to bother him early in tourneys but by the time he has played a few matches and runs into some tougher opponents it seems to effect his serve & his shot. on the other hand he might also figure out some ways around this, via better treatment or some little changes to his game.
I still think it is funny he played so terrible & Djoko still had to play the match of his life to beat him in 5 sets.
Still I think it's fed, I don't think Nadal can stay healthy enough for long enough, and I still think Fed is capable of winning a couple more majors. Nadal will have to have some off days in majors at some point (as Fed has) and w/o Nadal Fed is still the best bet against the field.
I don't think either of them will ever go down as the GOAT, there will always be somebody else who wins more slams than Fed (or Nadal), and people in the future might look on Fed like we do on Laver. Imo atm it's between Fed and Laver for the GOAT, but Rafa will challenge that and then somebody else will come along. There will always be a debate.
