Rafa & Roger: The Rivalry

[SoundfSilence]

and some of Nadal's response after Madrid,

I don't agree with that. It's his opinion and I respect it, but I don't share it. And it's not because I've just won these three tournaments. It's because I think it's unfair to judge a whole season by a single tournament. It's true that Paris is on top because it's a Slam. But let's not fool ourselves; it's much harder to win these three tournaments in a row than it is to win in Paris.

Excellent response by Nadal.

[Coolhand Texas]

But i bet nadal would rather win roland garros then those 3 in a row. Ahh Hell! who am i trying to fool he will win roland garros as well

[Mike Rotchtickles]

Q. I have a different question for you. Everyone in tennis loves Roger, respects Roger. He is said to be the best of all time. Yet two out of every three times you play him, you win. You've won six of the last seven times. Who's a better player?

RAFAEL NADAL: You like this. You are focused on the Roger thing, eh? (laughter.)
Yesterday with the clay. Today with the if somebody says I am better than Roger, I think this person don't know nothing about tennis. That's my answer.

Q. How so?

RAFAEL NADAL: Why?

Q. Yeah.

RAFAEL NADAL: So you don't know nothing about tennis.
You see the titles of him and you see the titles of me? It's no comparison. So that's the answer. Is difficult to compare Roger with me now, because he has 16 Grand Slams; I have 6. Masters 1000, yeah, I have more than him. But for the rest of the things the records of Roger is very, very almost impossible to improve.

Q. Still, it is interesting when you step out on the court...

RAFAEL NADAL: What?

Q. Still, it is interesting, Rafa, when you step out on the court...

RAFAEL NADAL: (Through translation.)
Sorry, I interrupt you. What's the question? Sorry.

Q. The question is: Still, for the fans, it is interesting when you step on the court with him, you usually win.

RAFAEL NADAL: Well, I am No. 2 in the world for five years, so I think I am a good player, too. Sure, I can beat him. No. 2 can beat No. 1. That's the thing. It's not a lot of difference between No. 2 and No. 1 or between No. 1 and No. 10. That's the tennis, and the tennis very close, the level, all the time.
But I can beat him, yes. The same time, the thing is I beat him a lot of times on clay. I beat him on other surfaces, too. But the most of the times I beat him on clay, so I played with him more times on clay than on the rest of the surfaces.



I must say respect to Rafa.

That last response of his is completely correct and the way I've always interpreted their lopsided H2H.
And that is that had Federer not been as good as he is on clay and being able to reach so many clay court finals, he would not have had to play Nadal and so his H2H with Rafa would not have been harmed in the way that it is.
Alternatively, Federer has been quite dominant on hardcourts at the USO but he has never had the chance to translate that dominance into a more positive H2H with Rafa simply because Nadal has not been good enough/injury free/fatigue free whatever, to make it to the finals to play Roger.

[Moralspain]

"It's not a lot of difference between No. 2 and No. 1 or between No. 1 and No. 10. That's the tennis, and the tennis very close, the level, all the time."

i completely agree with that statement

[fedfan]

"It's not a lot of difference between No. 2 and No. 1 or between No. 1 and No. 10. That's the tennis, and the tennis very close, the level, all the time."

i completely agree with that statement

I think the fact that Rafa and Roger have taken pretty much all the majors in the last 6 years would suggest otherwise. When they are on their game they are still a fair way ahead of most of the others.

[GOA MASTER MDMA]

nice to see that Q makes a interview with RAFA
so he makes a step in real life without the yehova nonsens !! thats nice



i know that Q means question

[VillaJ100]

I cant see anyone in the top 10 winning a major, maybe djokovic or murray. They can get to finals maybe, sure. but Fed and nadal just have what it takes to win.

[Moralspain]

"It's not a lot of difference between No. 2 and No. 1 or between No. 1 and No. 10. That's the tennis, and the tennis very close, the level, all the time."

i completely agree with that statement

I think the fact that Rafa and Roger have taken pretty much all the majors in the last 6 years would suggest otherwise. When they are on their game they are still a fair way ahead of most of the others.

yeah but i guess Rafa was talking about skills, i mean for example Soderling has better forehand, backhand and serve than Rafa, but the difference is the mentality, he´s a winner as well as Roger, that´s the main difference between these 2 guys and the rest, another diference is the regularly they have

[AMAZING ZIZOU]

if grass were to have 3 masters a year, how many do you think fd would have? just wondering

3 per year . Times let's say 7 (since 2003) equal 21 more potential masters to add to his 16.