He’s the best clay-court player in 30 years, he’s won five titles on hard courts, and he’s spent more weeks ranked no. 2 in the world than any man in history. In most other eras, Rafael Nadal, the rugged 21-year-old from the island of Majorca, would have dominated tennis. Instead, thanks to Roger Federer, he’s more of a nuisance than a worthy successor, a scruffy kid with ungainly groundstrokes who won’t let the man with the most beautiful game, the player everyone loves to love, make history.

At Wimbledon, which begins Monday, Nadal has a chance to change the terms of the conversation. For three plus years, as Federer has piled up major titles (10 in all) and put a stranglehold on the no. 1 ranking (177 weeks and counting), tennis fans have been on constant Federer Watch. When will he eclipse Pete Sampras’s record of 14 major titles? Could he win the calendar year Grand Slam? Will he be the best ever once he wins the French Open?

In two weeks, however, we might be talking about Nadal, Wimbledon champion, first man to win the French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back since Bjorn Borg in 1980, and future no. 1, perhaps by the end of the year. It’s a long shot, but not out of the question.

First, Wimbledon. Nadal surprised many when he made the final last year, but his performance was no fluke. After a slow start, he played superb, aggressive tennis, and he could have won two sets against Federer in the final. This year, Nadal should play better: His latest victory at the French Open (his third in a row) gave every indication that he’s beefed up his game. Nadal relies more on winners than his tireless legs these days, and he’s more comfortable playing close to the baseline and at the net.

It won’t hurt Nadal’s cause that Federer continues to underestimate him. Here’s Federer response, translated from French, when he was asked after the French Open final to compare this year’s Nadal to last year’s:

“I don’t think [Nadal] has made any progress. I always feel if he was to change his game, he might stop being able to win on clay. So I think he needs to keep this game, because with this specific type of game, he’s just unbeatable on clay.”

Federer credited Nadal with an excellent match, but for him to say Nadal has made no progress — well, it boggles the mind. It’s also measurably untrue.

In 2005, Nadal beat Federer in the finals of Monte Carlo and Rome, two of the three large clay-court warmup events. This year, Nadal defeated Federer in Monte Carlo, won in Rome (where Federer lost early), and lost to Federer in the Hamburg final (neither player entered Hamburg last year because the Rome final lasted five sets). MSL Software kept detailed statistics of those tournaments the last two years (thanks to Pedro Garcia at MSL for providing the data).

The samples are similar: In Monte Carlo and Rome last year, Nadal played 1,809 points (two best-of-five-set finals); In Monte Carlo, Rome, and Hamburg this year, he played 1,888 points (bestof-three-set finals).

In 2007, Nadal improved in every statistical category. Last year, he ended 14.4% of his points with a winner. This year that figure rose to 17.6%. His rate of errors remained roughly the same: 15.4% last year, 14.8% this year. He approached the net slightly more often this year and won a lot more often once he got there: 71.9% compared to 66.8%. He committed 29 fewer backhand errors in 79 more points (Nadal has done more to improve his backhand, which is now a bona fide weapon, than any other shot). After winning a remarkable 46.6% of points on his opponent’s serve last year, Nadal this year moved closer to 50%, which rarely happens for any length of time in top tennis (he won 48.6%).

This data confirms what every naked eye, save Federer’s, sees when it looks at Nadal: a much improved player. He’s hitting more winners and making the same number of mistakes. He serves more aces. He puts fewer service returns in play, but wins more points returning serve overall (translation: he’s going for more). Rather than playing and training like a clay-court expert, Nadal continues to develop a game that will suit him for another five or six years, no matter the surface.

In last year’s Wimbledon final, Federer played a tame match — effective enough to win, yet not as aggressive and confident as one would have expected. That won’t be good enough this year. Several lesser players might overpower Nadal earlier in the tournament (Ivo Karlovic, the 6-foot-10-inch Croat, comes to mind), but if the Spaniard reaches the final, he has the game to win.

If he succeeds, the no. 1 ranking won’t be so far away. Nadal has yet to play well in the second half of the season, which includes the American hard-court tournaments, the U.S. Open, and two important indoor events in Paris and Madrid. His poor showings in the past have left him with few points to defend, so he’ll gain a lot of ground on Federer if he can maintain his form. If Nadal won Wimbledon or the U.S. Open and lost to Federer in the final of the other, won either Montreal or Cincinnati and reached the quarterfinals of the other, and won either Paris or Madrid and reached the quarterfinal of the other, the no. 1 ranking would be in play at the season-ending Masters Cup, no matter what Federer does.

Four years is a long time for one man to remain atop the tennis world, even if that man might be remembered as the best player in the game’s history. Nadal’s chance to dislodge Federer might come sooner than anyone had expected.

tperrotta@nysun.com