If Rafael Nadal doesn't exist, would Roger Federer won 3 or 4 French Open?

Question

I say 3 but someone else say 4. In the 05 French Open he lost to Rafa in the semi final but he would of beat Puerta. However, this year, he would of lost to Novak even if Rafa is not playing. Agree or disagree.

Answer 1

I think he loses to Novak this year but wins the previous 3 years.  If not for Nadal, Federer wins the calendar slam at least 2 consecutive years, making him hands down the greatest player of all time in my estimation.

Answer 2

I think he would have won 1 or maybe 2, but definitely would not be winning them every year.  In '06, I don't think he'd get by Ljubicic.  In '08 Djokovic would have taken the title.  '07 I also don't think Federer would be a shoe-in seeing as how he'd play the winner between Moya and Djokovic then.  The only one I would give him easily would be '05.

Answer 3

i don't care how much he would have got if rafa never existed at all.

a decent 2 would have been enough to catapult him to being the greatest ever.

Answer 4

yes

Answer 5

I agree. He might win 3or4 French opens.

Answer 6

i think so, probably realistically he wld of won 3 in a row, i think with this years novak probably wld of edged it in a five-setter coz at the moment i wld say rafa is playing at the highest level then novak then federer(novak just playing alittle better than fed.

Answer 7

If just Rafa didn't exist and the rest of the things stayed as it is, then I'd go with what Aleksey said. If however Rafa didn't exist and the claycourters were as good as those in the Sampras era, then I feel he'd still be at 0.

Answer 8

perhaps, one. or two.. but not more. one has to remember that there were other claycourt specialists whom nadal defeated. they might have defeated roger in the finals.

Answer 9

i think so

Answer 10

yea federer would have..hes number 1 in the world...but at the same time nadal exist and rafa is the king on clay.