Tennis Forum banner

Bigger gap on clay

Bigger gap on clay- Serena vs Henin or Federer vs Nadal

30K views 471 replies 89 participants last post by  VeeJJ 
#1 ·
As everyone sane knows the greatest players of their generations are Serena Williams and Roger Federer. As everyone sane also knows neither are the greatest players of their generation on clay, that being Rafael Nadal and Justine Henin. One interesting question though is which is further ahead on clay, Nadal ahead of Federer or Henin ahead of Serena. Breaking it down:

Federer has won 14% of his matches vs Nadal on clay. Serena has won 20% of her matches with Justine Henin on clay. However Justine had nearly all her matches with Serena on clay in 2002-early 2003 when Serena was at her all time peak and Justine was not even a slam champion yet, and Justine still reached that percentage. Nadal and Federer both had many matches outside the others prime on clay, and with the same result, Nadal winning nearly everyone.

Federer has 1 French Open to Nadal's 6. Serena has 1 French Open to Henin's 4. The bigger gap there is Federer vs Nadal.

Federer is considered clearly the 2nd best clay courter of his generation. Serena is arguably but not clearly the 2nd best clay courter of her generation. Both clay court eras are weak overall.

Nadal is the GOAT on clay to most, and Henin is not considered the female GOAT on clay by most, although in the top 5 by most people, and top 3 by some. Federer though is overall a greater clay courter amongst the men than Serena amongst the women.

So which has the bigger gap on clay. Henin over Serena, or Nadal over Federer
 
See less See more
#6 ·
Serena's not a good clay courter. Period. It's ridiculous that Fed and her have the same amount of FO titles. Fed is the BEST clay courter of this generation after Nadal, making multiple RG finals, crushing everyone, including "gluten-free" Fakervic at 30 years old. He would be a multiple FO winner if Nadal wasn't there (who is arguable clay GOAT), simple as that.

What has Serena done on clay outside that fluke 2002 title? How many more finals has she reached and how many clay court specialists has she beat? Henin's clay level was vastly superior to Serena's and it's not even close. Federer proved he can crush Nadull on clay as proved by the bagel in Hamburg and 2009 Madrid thrashing. But he ALWAYS choked in big finals - even when dominating the moonballer effortlessly.
 
#7 ·
I voted Nadal over Federer slightly. Yes Federer is a better clay courter than Serena, but he is an overrated clay courter. I rank him only top 15 all time really. Serena is a very underrated clay courter on this forum. I laugh at how people conclude Kuznetsova or Ivanovic are somehow much better clay courters, when none of the stats suggest this (and peak level of play on clay doesnt either really).

Henin is an all time great on clay, but she doesnt have much argument as the best ever, while Nadal is clearly the best ever mens clay courter IMO.
 
#137 ·
Very close, but I would go with Justine over Serena. As you said, most of their clay court matches were when Serena was at her best, and Justine not at her best. Nadal could be the greatest clay courter of all-time, but arguements could be made for Rosewall and Borg. Federer is and all-time great clay courter just below the very top level. I would rate Sveta over Ana and even Serena after 03. That is of course when Sveta was playing her best tennis, which was not very often.
 
#10 ·
Why didn't you include thier RG final appearances, and other clay wins? :confused: There's way more to this question than amount of RGs won.
Point taken. I dont feel I need to write a 12 page essay explaining every stat though. I am sure most on this forum are very familiar with all 4 players and their achievements on every surface.

Federer has better stats than Serena in this regard too, but Serena did win Rome and Charleston, the 2nd and 3rd biggest clay events today, while Federer has never won Rome or Monte Carlo, the 2nd and 3rd biggest clay events of his day, which is a big edge for Serena. Meanwhile Nadal far trumps Henin in dominance of other big clay events.

Also, how on earth could Justine be top 3 on clay? Evert, Court and Graf clearly are greater than her. :wavey:
I agree but it is clear by my clay court poll that alot do consider her top 3 all time on clay, largely due to the natural bias towards more recent players (the same reason some even call Federer a top 6 player all time on clay which is ridiculous IMO).
 
#12 ·
2002 BERLIN J.Henin 6-2 1-6 7-6(5)
2002 ROME S. Williams 7-6(6) 6-4
2003 CHARLESTON J.Henin 6-3 6-4
2003 FRENCH OPEN J.Henin 6-2 4-6 7-5
2007 FRENCH OPEN J.Henin 6-4 6-3


2005 Roland Garros Nadal 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
2006 Rome Nadal 6-7(0), 7-6(5), 6-4, 2-6, 7-6(5)
2006 Roland Garros Nadal 1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6(4)
2006 Monte Carlo Nadal 6-2, 6-7(2), 6-3, 7-6(5)
2007 Monte Carlo Nadal 6-4, 6-4
2007 Hamburg Federer 2-6, 6-2, 6-0
2007 Roland Garros Nadal 6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4
2008 Monte Carlo Nadal 7-5, 7-5
2008 Hamburg Nadal 7-5, 6-7(3), 6-3
2008 Roland Garros Nadal 6-1, 6-3, 6-0
2009 Madrid Federer 6-4, 6-4
2010 Madrid Nadal 6-4, 7-6(5)
2011 Madrid Nadal 5-7, 6-1, 6-3
2011 Roland Garros Nadal 7-5, 7-6(3), 5-7, 6-1
 
#16 ·
IMHO, Serena, Justine and Roger are very lucky to have competed in an era of very very weak clay competition (besides Henin and Nadal themselves of course).

The gap between Roger and Rafa is HUGE. It's not even a competition and Roger is my favorite player.
It's clear that Henin is better on clay than Serena, but PeakRena is pretty formidable to the point that I'd say she wins 3-4/10 matches against PeakJustine on clay. Has nothing to do with Serena being a good claycourter because she isn't for sure.. it's more that PeakRena being the supreme athlete she was could just overwhelm you with serve, return, speed, power, etc.
 
#165 · (Edited)
IMHO, Serena, Justine and Roger are very lucky to have competed in an era of very very weak clay competition (besides Henin and Nadal themselves of course).
Clown opinion. Federer was easily better than all of clay courters in the 90's. His problem wasn't clay. His problem was Nadal on clay. Federer would rather face 3-4 decent clay courters in a row, rather than beat poor CC'ers and then having to face Nadal in every final. If Fed played in the 90's he'd have at least 3FO...

2002 BERLIN J.Henin 6-2 1-6 7-6(5)
2002 ROME S. Williams 7-6(6) 6-4
2003 CHARLESTON J.Henin 6-3 6-4
2003 FRENCH OPEN J.Henin 6-2 4-6 7-5
2007 FRENCH OPEN J.Henin 6-4 6-3


2005 Roland Garros Nadal 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-3
2006 Rome Nadal 6-7(0), 7-6(5), 6-4, 2-6, 7-6(5)
2006 Roland Garros Nadal 1-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-6(4)
2006 Monte Carlo Nadal 6-2, 6-7(2), 6-3, 7-6(5)
2007 Monte Carlo Nadal 6-4, 6-4
2007 Hamburg Federer 2-6, 6-2, 6-0
2007 Roland Garros Nadal 6-3, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4
2008 Monte Carlo Nadal 7-5, 7-5
2008 Hamburg Nadal 7-5, 6-7(3), 6-3
2008 Roland Garros Nadal 6-1, 6-3, 6-0
2009 Madrid Federer 6-4, 6-4
2010 Madrid Nadal 6-4, 7-6(5)
2011 Madrid Nadal 5-7, 6-1, 6-3
2011 Roland Garros Nadal 7-5, 7-6(3), 5-7, 6-1
...and thanks for proving my point. Fed was good enough to be there in tons of clay finals, Nadal and only Nadal stopped him. The amount of clay matches Henin had vs Serena is pitiful in comparison. Because Serena was never good enough to go deep on clay like Fed. She was vulnerable to tons of players. Fed thrashed everyone on clay in his prime except Nadal


Federer was far luckier at the 2009 French then Serena was at the 2002 French.
Luck doesn't come into play when you made multiple FO finals prior. WTA tour never had a clay monster like Nadal. If Serena had to contend with WTA player with similar style to Nadal, she'd get thrashed badly, regardless of the year. Fed deserved FO far more than Serena who never ever had to face a true clay GOAT and couldn't even make more than one final :eek:
 
#20 ·
Federer was far luckier at the 2009 French then Serena was at the 2002 French. Henin was mentaly fragile, not in her prime physically or technically either, and had gone 1-1 vs Serena on clay. She was at best 45% likely to beat Serena even if they met in the quarters that year (although I agree no way she would have lost to either Capriati or Venus if she did, barring a major 02 Charleston level choke). A much stronger Henin barely Serena the next year. The only match she came close to losing was the semifinal to Capriati. Federer in 2009, like all years, had roughly 0% chance to beat Nadal if they met at Roland Garros, or maybe 5% that year since Nadal was legitimately injured IMO. He nearly lost to Haas and Del Potro, probably should have lost both matches.
 
#21 ·
Federer has a great game for clay and does not hate it, like Serena. He can move great, hang in rallies (even if he can get murdered by high balls to his backhand) and finish points if necessary. Serena can only do the latter and even that is rarely in her control against decent players.

That said, there are very few women players who are good on clay. At least on the ATP, most top players are pretty good on it, and some of them are great.

Anyway, Justine over Serena. They played way less than Fedal though, so that percentage is not a good way to do the comparison.
 
#23 ·
At her peak level of '02-'03, Serena showed she can be a formidable clay-courter..who came two points away from doing the Berlin-Rome-RG trifecta. She was never the same after her injury though..

Roger vs Nadal? Roger is just hopeless against Nadal.
 
#25 ·
Nadal over Federer. But if you compare the relative levels of play across the two tours. Federer is a much better claycourter than the rest of the ATP tour than Serena is over the WTA tour. It's just that Nadal is amazing on the stuff.
 
#438 ·
Exactly. Those that voted for "Henin over Serena" voted that way because relatively speaking FedTard is a better clay court player than Serena BUT if u answer the question of the biggest gap it's a no-brainer Nadal vs Federer.

How can u seriously answer the question any other way:confused:

Nadal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer on clay
Henin >>>> Serena on clay
...even though relatively speaking FedTard >>>>>>>>>> Serena on clay.

The question is 'the biggest gap'- and there's more of a difference between Nadal and FedTard than there is between Henin and Serena.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bandabou
#30 ·
Fed BAGELED Nadal on clay and did beat him twice. Peak Serena could never bagel Henin on clay even if Henin was playing at her worst.

Fed also choked a lot in some of clay matches against Nadal. He is not totally hopeless. Rafa is just a bad match up for him in general and Fed is mentally very weak against him which helped Rafa to win almost all the tight matches between them. Fed was by far the second best claycourter in the last 6 years. Can't say the same thing about Serena. There is better claycourter(s) than her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnbert
#33 ·
Nadal is one of the best clay court players ever, and Federer is a good clay courter. Nadal owns Federer on clay is nearly always expected to win. Serena is an average clay court player but against Justine its much closer than the Nadal/Federer clay gap. When you look at the Rena/Juju match up H2H on clay the '02 Berlin match could have gone either way and so could have the '03 RG match. Who ever won that '03 SF would have won the title IMHO it just so happens that Justine won. Federer hasn't even taken Nadal to 5 sets at RG. Also Nadal has given Federer a beat down on clay (6-1 6-3 6-0) Justine's best result against Serena on clay was 3 and 4. So yeah the Nadal-Federer gap is bigger
 
#35 ·
On pure claycourt talent level, the Henin-Serena gap is bigger. Roger has a great claycourt game, and the reason he loses to Nadal so often on the surface is because Nadal is a huge grinder/fighter, while Roger isn't quite as mentally strong and doesn't have the right mentality for the surface. Peak Serena made the most of her weapons by imposing her hardcourt game on clay and willing herself to victories in tough spots.

So overall, the Justine-Serena gap is smaller. The mental game is everything on clay.
 
#36 ·
the reason why roger loses to nadal on clay is just the matchup. slow court, high bounce and nadal's huge topspin is poison for rogers backhand.

the exact opposite at indoors. fast courts, low bounce and his topspin isn't nearly effective as on clay. thats why nadal can't hurt roger there and loses to him.

also i guess the h2h would be complete different if nadal wouldn't be a lefty...
 
#44 · (Edited)
Nadal-Federer.

It takes Peak Federer to make things remotely close. I don't know what mental has anything to do it. It's a terrible matchup. Nadal just kills Federer's mediocre backhand. It's really that simple. The only way for Federer to make this a match actually is to keep the points very short and try and attack as early as he can, and follow it to the net. Like he did in the first set in RG this year. If he tries to hang in rallies, he's toast.
 
#46 ·
Henin over Serena. Actually Federer and Henin's claycourt style is VERY similar, and one would have to be crazy to think that if it weren't for Kneedal Roger would've won multiple FO's.

So the bigger gap is clearly between Henin and Jameka. The serving-GOAT is neutralized on clay and she's been reaching the QFs a few times since her fluke 2002 title on sheer will alone. Sexlana and Stosur handed her her booty comprehensively in 09 and 10
 
#48 ·
Didn't Stosur beat Serena when Serena had a MP and choked it away and she also had a big lead against Sexlana. And, if 2002 is a fluke then so is Roger's 2009 title considering it was the height of Nadal's knee injury woes. Maria had a kind draw this year, so where's her fluke RG win?! :spit:
 
#47 ·
I actually think Serena's issue on clay are much more mental than Federer's.

She can win on clay. She just has to play somewhere around her best, and she's not confident she can do this without the free points off her serve. She really becomes a mental midget on this surface. She should not have lost to either Shitlana or Stosur in RG. She was playing terrific tennis against Kuz in the first set before choking.

Federer, on the other hand, has to play out of his skin just to keep things close, and his only chance is to take control from the start of the point and finish it quickly before Nadull starts looping junk to his backhand - then the point is over.
 
#57 ·
Clay is a peasant's surface. Your socks get dirty, the ball bounces irregularly, it's weird to move on and it favours pushers.

There's nothing like a well manicured grass court. It just feels better even before you play.

As for the question, obviously Henin has a bigger gap.

This is just an attempt to keep La Main relevent. Blast of the past :wavey:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top