Normally whoever comes away with the most titles and majors is winning the rivalry, right? To narrow it down even further, it has to be the ones, won at the expense of the other.
At McEnroe-Borg rivalry, their H2H is 7-7. But as far as the majors go, McEnroe won the 1980 and 1981 US Open and 1981 Wimbledon by beating Borg in the finals, whereas Borg just won the 1980 Wimbledon by beating McEnroe in the finals. That’s 3-1 in favor of McEnroe. McEnroe the winner!!!
Sampras-Agassi rivalry: Sampras leads the H2H 20-14. Together they clashed in 9 majors. Sampras won 6 of those encounters, 3 for Agassi. Sampras winner in every category here. No contest.
Federer-Nadal rivalry: They have clashed in 3 majors. Nadal winning the two FO’s, Federer winning at Wimbledon.
Federer is really the one hurting in this rivalry, big time. If Federer wasn’t in the picture, it seems Nadal would have still won the 20 titles he has by age 20. OK, three more.
But if Nadal wasn’t there, Federer probably would have become the only man, other than Rod Laver to win two Grand Slams, and maybe this year, could have become the only man to win the third one.
Nadal is the only player who has denied Federer that shot at ‘tennis immortality’. That record is bigger than topping Sampras’s 14 majors, anyday. Federer will never forget this thorn in his side, despite whatever else he does, when the smoke clears.
Sampras can take comfort in knowing that it was not just one player he had to solve to master clay and that he was never in the finals. His best result was semifinals in 1996. But to first of all, come so close as the semifinals and the finals two straight years and then to lose to the same player who eventually wins it all, has to pull on your strings.
Nadal is not really worried about Federer since he has a terrific 2-2 H2H against him on hard surface. Being only 20 and still mastering that surface, he should be more than happy, to have that record against arguably the best tennis player in history. Specially when specialists of those surfaces have a losing record against Federer.
Federer you have to be smart and talk to Nadal. Does everything have to come to fighting? You are both matured adults and should solve your problems like grown up do: By cheating!!! There – I said it.
You need to take Nadal out for dinner and have a man to man talk. Make a deal. If he lets you win the Roland Garros, you will let him win the Wimbledon. Heck, throw in the US Open too.
You know how to play these matches, don’t you? Just like you played at that freak show two days ago at the ‘Battle of the Surfaces’. You win the first one, then let him win the next. Just alternate and the foolish public will think you are having a close match and they are getting their money’s worth.
You are not doing anything new. William sisters have been doing it forever.
This is how adults achieve success, don’t you know? You have to act like adults now. Before long you will be entering the adult world after tennis, so this will be good practice.
Besides, you have so much to gain. Just one Roland Garros gets you the stamp of the greatest ever. Without it, just one of the best. Massive difference.
You have to get this big one, hook or by crook. Nobody will know. Nobody comes on this stupid site, anyway. The ones who do, won’t understand. Believe me. Trust me. Its all for your good. It’s a win win win win win win for both of you. In the real world, take my word, we don’t care how you get there, as long as you are there. So there you have it. Go for it and like that lion said in ‘Lion King’ – it’s our little secret.