Re: Re: KING
by VASUDEVAN V on Jun 04, 2010 09:58 AM
The only way you can call Nadal the King of Tennis is by making Federer the Monarch of all he surveys. However, since Federer is the 2nd best on Clay to Nadal and the best on all other surfaces we have to compromise by saying that Federer is presently the King of Tennis and Nadal the King of Clay courts. This has to be the order till Nadal surpasses the 16 grandslam titles of Federer!
Re: Re: Re: KING
by Sagar Mulay on Jun 04, 2010 10:40 AM
I dont think Nadala necessarily neds to win more than 16 GS to be called greater than Federer. Yes, he does need to win US Open, show more GS wins in other GS and finish his career with 12-13 GS. Needless to say, he will always be remembered as Federer's nemesis.
Re: Re: Re: Re: KING
by VASUDEVAN V on Jun 04, 2010 10:50 AM
No, he will never be remembered as Federer's nemesis. Nadal is the best on Clay in the present era and his H2H against Federer is 10-2 on that surface which is the reason for the lopsided H2H. On other surfaces the H2H is 5-4 in Federer's favour. That is why I have clearly stated that Nadal is the King of clay and Federer the King of Tennis. No, it is not enough if Nadal merely wins 12 or 13 Grandslams to be called the greatest. Just as Federer was considered the greatest only after he overtook the 14 grandslam titles of Sampras (whose best at French is a single appearance in the Semis as against Federer's 4 finals including a win and 1 Semis) Nadal can be called the greatest only after he surpasses the 16 grandslam titles of Federer or at least manages calendar grandslam (i.e. winning all four grandslam titles in a single calendar year). Let us not undermine the achievements of Federer just because Nadal dominates on clay.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: KING
by Sweta on Jun 04, 2010 07:46 PM
If you simply keeping harping Federer mantra, he will not become the King. First let him beat Nadal on Clay and then we can call him King of Tennis.. Until then Mr. Vasu please be content in calling Federer King-of-all-but-Clay. hehehe.
Re: Re: Re: KING
by CC on Jun 04, 2010 10:37 AM
federer arrived sampras,aggassi on the verge of retirment. So there was no one can compete fedrer but after Nadal arrival the winning margin of federer dip down. even nadal beaten federer on his favourite gross court(wibeldon). i feel nadal will beat federers grandslam record.
Re: Re: Re: Re: KING
by Manjesh on Jun 04, 2010 11:39 AM
Nadal has beaten Federer on Wimbledon and at Australian Open.But Federer is easily over powered by nadal in clay....So Nadal is the emperor...the slayer of king fedex
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: KING
by VASUDEVAN V on Jun 04, 2010 12:48 PM
Mr.Manjesh: Outside French, Nadal and Federer have met four times in grandslam finals (thrice in Wimbledon and once in Australian open) and the resut is 2-2. Hence, it is bullshit to say that Nadal is slayer and all that. Nadal first won a grandslam in 2005 (French Open). Since that time Federer has won 12 grandslams to Nadal's 5. Out of the 12 won by Federer, Nadal was there in the fray in 11 of them and could not even reach the finals in 9 of them. This is just to prove how great Federer is, because Nadal falls even before the finals. Nadal is just king of clay and Federer is the king of all he surveys - that is the difference between the two!
