Who is more dominent on their respective surface?

Question

Federer in grass? or Nadal in Clay

I feel Nadal is more superior in clay and almost he is unconquerable but Federer is not so dominent in grass as Nadal is in clay .Federer struggles against Nadal in last year Wimbledon and Nadal almost threatens to win it and missed by a whisker

And Do you think Roger Federer Tennis is on Decline?

Answer 1

Even though I like Federer, Nadal is unstoppable on clay as you saw at the French Open.

Answer 2

I don't think there is any doubt, it is Nadal on clay.  While Fed is one of the greatest grass court players ever, Nadal is THE best ever on clay.  As for Federer being on the decline..... I don't think so.  However, what I'll point out is that there are several players who no longer fear him.  It is the same thing that happened to Sampras toward the last few years of his career.  Djokovic and Nadal have no fear of Federer.  Really big servers like Isner and Karlovic know that they can stay in match with Fed just by serving.  He's still one of the greatest players ever, but he is less dominant (just slightly) than he has been in the past.

Answer 3

nadal!

Answer 4

Rafa on clay no doubt and by miles. The guy has been winning frenchy ever since he came onto the scene. Even fed took atleast 4-5 years to start winning wimby. Nobody holds a candle to Rafa's clay prowess.

Answer 5

That's a really good question.  I'd like to pose this thought.. It is really hard to discuss Federer on grass vs Nadal on clay.  This is because there are far fewer grass court tourneys than clay ones.  Here comes a complicated answer.  Hope it makes sense.

Facts:

1. Federer has never lost to nadal in a pure grass court match.  Nadal has lost to Federer once on clay.  Take this into account though, Federer has played Nadal 10 times on clay which means that Federer is right there winning on clay with him and meeting him in finals(losing mostly).  Nadal has only played Federer twice on grass because he has only made a grass court final twice.  

2.  For a straight out number:

Nadal: 91% wins on Clay,   Federer: 86 % wins on grass.

However when you look at these numbers it doesnt take into account that fact that there arent as many tourneys on grass.  I would love to try and calculate how Federer would have done if there were a similar number of tournaments on grass as clay.  Because Federer hasn't lost a match on grass since 2002 which is a 100% winning percentage.  

3.  If you look at nadal's record, he wasn't completely dominant right away.  But neither was federer.  In fact during their formative years on their surfaces nadal had a .72 winning percentage and Federer had a .59.  Then they started their dominance at the same time pretty much.  The only difference is that Federer hasn't lost since then and nadal has.  

So what we have is that Nadal began dominating sooner and this is no surprise because there are more clay court tournaments to play and you can learn quicker.  But once Federer hit his stride he hasn't lost on his surface yet.  I think that even though Nadal has a better winning percentage on his surface, Federer has been more dominant and if there were as many grass tournaments as clay, his percentage would support that.

Answer 6

Nadal is unplayable in clay.There is no one who can touch him at least 2-3 yrs except Djokovic who can him a good competition.                                                                                     Its true that Federer is good in grass & he has proved that but its not like there is no one who can  beat him in grass.Infact Nadal gave a good fight last year & i think Djokovic is in great form this year,so he also have a great chance.And one can also expect some surprise packages like Tsonga/Monfis.