2007-09-03 15:26:35 · 14 answers · asked by liscsoccerdude12 3 in Sports ➔ Tennis
The answer has to do with the points scoring system used in tournaments. If you look at the "World Rankings" on the ATP site, you will see that Federer has 7600 points, while Nadal has only 5500. By making it further into more tournaments, Federer gets more points. The rankings have nothing to do with head to head matches, but only on the points scoring systems. It's the same reason the Red Sox are still in first place in the AL East, even when the Yankees beat them in the last series they played. It has to do with overall scoring, not head to head matches
2007-09-03 16:50:02 · answer #1 · answered by tensprocris 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He only beats him on clay, his specialty, and they've met many times on clay. Federer owns Nadal and everyone else on grass and mostly on hard courts.
Here's the breakdown:
Nadal has an 8-5 record against Federer.
He is 6-1 on clay
2-2 on hard courts
0-2 on grass
If they had 7 meetings on grass and only 2 on clay, Nadal would most likely be 3-10 against Federer, at best. And this isn't even counting all of the titles Federer has over Nadal.
2007-09-03 15:36:27 · answer #2 · answered by bada_bing2k4 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Federer beats Nadal much more often than the other way around. Also it's because federer has won more grand slams and beaten better opponents easier than Nadal
2007-09-03 15:33:41 · answer #3 · answered by dshookey1 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The win streak of Nadal against Feder has to do with clay, but in Germany in the tournament a couple weeks before the French Feder showed that he is getting better on clay because he ended Nadal's consecutive match winning streak on clay at 81.
2007-09-03 22:50:50 · answer #4 · answered by sokokl 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nadal only beats him on clay, and Federer finally go the best of him. That is why Federer and not Nadal, is number 1.
2007-09-03 15:32:49 · answer #5 · answered by elias 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Your thinking is correct but i want to tell you that player coming on the 1st position by performing consistenly and Nadal does that.
But the fact is that Roger was far ahead from the Nadal in the points and Nadal is new player than the Federer and he has to perform consistently and go ahead of Fed.
And i also hoping that this time come soon.
2007-09-03 20:18:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ah, there's the difference - Federer gets to the latter stages of virtually every tournament he plays (excluding IW/MI and Rome this year) whether it be on clay, hard, grass or carpet. Nadal can only do it consistently on clay. On clay, Nadal has Federer's number, he's tactically too good. They never get a chance to play on hard because Nadal never gets as far as Federer, hence Nadal's lower ranking.
2007-09-04 01:38:05 · answer #7 · answered by second only to trollalalala 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it doesnt matter how many times you've beaten a player, all the major championships seedings will go by ATP tour rankings, except for maybe wimbledon, and even then they rank nadal #2...which is fair since he did make the finals the past 2 years
and plus the fact that fed has a winning record over nadal besides all those losses on clay helps
the only reason fed doesnt play nadal nearly as often on grass is due to the short grass court season, and nadal doesnt make it far enough in the grass tournaments to play fed...except for wimbledon..which undoubtedly proves that nadal is definately a big game player willing to play his best at the best events
2007-09-03 22:50:54 · answer #8 · answered by takumi86 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
agree with Vincent K.
Federer has made the last nine grand slam finals and won 7. Nadal has only made it to the final in 4 of those and won 2 of them.
2007-09-03 16:22:47 · answer #9 · answered by Sammyboy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Federer wins the other 3 slams.
2007-09-04 02:45:11 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋