Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

[OMlawdog]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

With the following guidelines:

3 matches, Clay, Grass, Hard court;

Best two out of three;

Each player would be at their peak and fully healthy. Who do you take if your soul hangs in the balance?

Also, does that determine for you who was the greater player?Or does the number of titles determine that for you, regardless of head to head decisions. Im in a debate with a buddy about simply who is better and we came up with these guidelines and I wanted to see some feedback.

I picked Nadal, who would you take?

 

[patdog]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

Federer would take 2 of 3. He'd win on grass (close) and hard courts (not close) and lose badly on clay.

 

[OMlawdog]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

I just can't pick Federer to beat Nadal on grass with Nadal at his peak. 22 year old Nadal had the epic win over 27 year old Federer. Surpringsly they've only played 3 times on grass, and its not like Federer was over the hill when they played in 2008;

As for the hard courts, as much as I think you are right, their career head to head mark on the hard courts is 4-4; Which surprised me. Its an interesting debate because there is no right answer.

By the time Federer retires, I expect the head to head result to be skewed in Nadal's favor, but it's close.

 

[aTotal360]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

 

[lawdawg02]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

That's obviously Nadal's surface.

As for the three matches on grass, the only one Nadal won was 9-7 in the fifth set. You're right, Federer wasn't over the hill, but he was perhaps on the backside of his career, and it still took an epic performance for Nadal to get the win. Federer is generally regarded as the best grass court player ever, and like Nadal on clay, I think that surface is his.

Hard courts seem to be a tossup. I'd give it to Federer, but I don't really have a great reason as to why, other than at his best, his serve is better.

 

[patdog]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

their career head to head mark on the hard courts is 4-4; Which surprised me.

For a long time, they only met on hard courts when Nadal was playing his very best tennis. Usually, he'd lose before he got to Federer. If Nadal had been a little better on hard courts earlier in his career, his record against Federer would be more like 7-14 instead of 4-4.

 

[DirtyLopez]

Since we have some tennis players on here: If you had to pick one, Nadal or Federer....

and why does federer have such an advantage on hard court?