Why Rafael Nadal is better than Roger Federer

Did you see Nadal destroy everyone in his win at the US Open again? He went almost the entire tornament without dropping a game where he served. He beat number one Djokovic comfortably in 4 sets for the championship.

Rafael Nadal is the best player in our generation. Perhaps the best of all time. Nadal is better than Roger Federer ever was. A lot better. Federer was good, but not the best ever. Not by a long shot.

Federer does have the record of grand slam titles with 17. But who did he beat? No one. Federer's wins were in a time period when there were no great tennis players. Nadal was still a teenager and Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi were almost retired. Federer is a good player that got to play against a bunch of nobodies.


When Federer was in his prime and young Nadal stepped onto the scene, Federer stopped winning almost immediatly. Nadal has a career 21-10 record against Fed, and is 8-2 in grand slam matches. One of those two wins over Nadal was the Wimbledon final where Nadal was playing with a messed up knee, and Fed still only won just by the thinnest of margins (7-6 4-6 7-6 2-6 6-2). This was in Federer's prime, and Nadal was still up and coming.

Since then, Nadal has dominated Federer. Djokovic has dominated Federer. Federer's "prime" was when he was twenty four because when he turned twenty seven, Nadal was already kicking his butt. Nadal is now twenty seven and he is still dominating.

So Federer has 17 grand slam title compared to Nadal's 13. But like I said earlier, Federer didn't have to beat anyone good. Nadal has to fight for every single championship. He has always had to go up against Federer and Djokovic - two of the greats. Even Andy Murry is probably better than anyone Federer had to play when he was winning his grand slams. On top of that, Nadal has missed quiet a few grand slam opportunities because of injury.

Nadal is the best player I've been alive to watch. Maybe the best ever. Federer is great, but not legendary.


EDIT 6/9/2014 - With his 14th grand slam title, Nadal is now the only player to win at least one Grand Slam for 10 years straight. He also has 4 Davis Cups (Federer has 0) and Nadal has an Olympic gold in singles and Federer does not.

Nadal is also now 9-2 in Grand Slams against Federer. The only 2 losses were on Federer's best court (Wimbledon) in the Final. Also, Nadal was only 19 and 20 years old then. Since Nadal was 20 years old, he's never lost to Federer in a grand slam tournament.

EDIT 10/25/2014 - In a nut shell, Fed dominated until actual competition arrived. He feasted on sub-par players. He won 12 of his 17 grand slams in his early 20's before players like Nadal and Djokovic were even 20 years old yet. When Federer hit 26 (his "prime") he should have been more dominate that ever. Instead, he started losing because actual competition like Nadal and Djokovic stepped into the scene. He was 26 in 2008, and since the beginning of 2008, he has only won five grand slams. Nadal has more than double that since 2008 with ELEVEN. Even Djokovic has more with seven. And this was all right under Federer's prime years (starting at age 26).

Bottom line: Rodger Federer was the best tennis player compared to his competition for only three years. Ranging from 2004-2007. During those three years with poor competition, Federer took advantage and won 12 grand slams! When the competition got better (Nadal turned 20 years old, Djokovic turned 20 years old, etc.), Federer, who was in the middle of his prime at age 26, stopped winning.

From 2008, Nadal, injuries and all, won 11 slams to Federer's five. That's more than double.

And since 2008, Nadal is never lost to Federer in a grand slam tournament (9-0)