Federer's 51 winners to Nadal's 32 winners?

[calitennis127]

If you take the aces out of the equation, it was still 37-22 in favor of Federer (Federer only beat Nadal in aces 14-10).

Will the likes of MikeOne still try to argue that Nadal has as much offensive firepower as Fed? This is just one of dozens of examples of that not being the case. But I'm not sure that Mike is open to evidence.

 

[El Dude]

Is it worth starting a new thread, though?

 

[Ricardo]

You bet Mike will write up stories to suit his argument. Just wait Cali.

 

[calitennis127]

Is it worth starting a new thread, though?

Yes, given what many people on this board have said over the years. This statistic is about more than just the numbers of one match, which is what Moxie would like to downplay it as because she has nothing to say about it (that's why she liked your post).

If some people are going to argue that Nadal has Federer's quality of offensive game, then numbers like these are completely fair game.

 

[brokenshoelace]

If some people are going to argue that Nadal has Federer's quality of offensive game, then numbers like these are completely fair game.

Literally nobody argues that. I mean, OK, maybe Anti-Pusher does but I mean, yeah OK.

 

[calitennis127]

Literally nobody argues that. I mean, OK, maybe Anti-Pusher does but I mean, yeah OK.

MikeOne has argued that, and Moxie clearly believes it as well.

 

[MikeOne]

If you take the aces out of the equation, it was still 37-22 in favor of Federer (Federer only beat Nadal in aces 14-10).

Will the likes of MikeOne still try to argue that Nadal has as much offensive firepower as Fed? This is just one of dozens of examples of that not being the case. But I'm not sure that Mike is open to evidence.

when did i ever say Nadal has the same firepower as Fed?

incidentally, Nadal hit more winners than Federer in their RG semi final.

Federer hits more winners than Nadal, he also almost always makes more UFEs. To me, what counts is the Winner/UFE ratio as any player can hit more winners but if they hit more UFEs, what's the point?.

Winners are nice, doesn't tell me anything if winners don't equate to wins. Tennis is not only about winners, you have to limit your UFEs and there is a very underrated stat we need to talk about - forced error. What is a forced error? usually comes when a player like Nadal, Djoker has control of the point, dictating play and 'forcing' the error. Agassi was the master of this, he would sometimes play matches where he would be attacking most of the time but not hit that many winners. Agassi moved his opponents side to side until opponents cracked.. Novak and Nadal are similar. Federer is more like Pete but like Pete, Fed drowns in UFEs sometimes. You can't talk to me about winners if you don't bring up UFEs cali. An UFE negates a winner....