Is it REALLY a rivalry?

As Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal get ready to play their quadrillionth (actually 16th) match against each other, this time in Hamburg, something kind of came to mind: Is Rafa a true rival or just a roadblock? You're probably thinking, "Van, what are you talking about? Look, Rafa's won more than he's lost against Federer. What else do you want?" Well, let me tell you! And since I'm all about democracy, have your vote here on the issue.

What I want out of a rivalry is the anticipation, and I think the R-Fed/R-Nad one lacks it because so much of it depends on the surface they're playing on. If it's on clay, nine times out of 10, Rafa's gonna take it; the exact opposite is the case if it's on grass or carpet. Hard courts offer a little bit of a toss-up, but technically, Federer should be able to nab those seven or eight times out of 10.

Also, even though he's probably the most musclebound player in history, Rafa's basically disappeared post-Wimbledon the past couple of years due to his body breaking down on him. Also, I think Nadal is way more prone to early-round upsets once you get off the dirt than Federer is, his recent slump aside.

Nadal's made big strides in his game as his back-to-back finals at Wimbledon shows. However, I just don't see him being a year-round threat to Federer. They're just no Chrissie and Martina, or Seles and Graf, or McEnroe and Lendl. Novak Djokovic could become a more legit year-round rival, but he's not there just yet.

So while there may be roadblocks in Federer's path, rivals are lacking.

(Photos: Federer, Getty; Nadal: AP)