Federer vs Nadal Who Is Ahead As Of Now?
- Thread starter Neptune
- Start date
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
The Sinner
Semi-Pro
You’ve mentioned ‘rigged’ draws hundreds of times across the forum. Do you have solid evidence of this?
Razer
Legend
He doesn't have any evidence, he is a troll.
Phoenix*
Professional
Apparently not.
which polls?
in almost every poll on the net it is like nole >>>> fed >>> rafa:
before 400 weeks, 40 masters, 7 WTFs and 8 YE#1a: 59%, 29%, 12%
12,5K votes
Rafael Nadal thrashed by Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer in tennis GOAT debate
Express Sport readers have delivered their verdict on tennis' Big Three.www.express.co.uk
Novak Djokovic 71.64% (1,791 votes)
Who is the GOAT in Tennis? - Federer, Nadal or Djokovic
Who is the GOAT in Tennis is a question that tennis fans have debated for many years with most agreeing that it will be Federer, Nadal or Djokovic.toomanyrackets.com
Roger Federer 17.52% (438 votes)
Rafa Nadal 10.44% (261 votes)
Other:0.4% (10 votes)
Total Votes: 2,500
Eurosport
Oct 6, 2022 when rafa was a slam leader!!!
@eurosport
If you could only pick one to be the GOAT, which one are you picking? Over to you...
Rafael Nadal 20.7%
Roger Federer 28.2%
Novak Djokovic 51.1%
4,699 votes·Final results
69%, 20%, 9%
Votes > 105k
62%, 26%, 12%
etc...etc....etc...
Neptune
Hall of Fame
Kindly refer to the first post of this thread for a glimpse of the tip of the iceberg.
The Sinner
Semi-Pro
So what are your thoughts of Djoko’s cream puff draws of recent times then? Were they rigged in favour of the Serb?
Neptune
Hall of Fame
Could you please conduct further research and provide more detailed information so that we can verify?
The Sinner
Semi-Pro
Yes, I have figured it out. The hate towards Nadal and Federer is so much, that no matter what you bring to the table of discussion is purely a waste of time. You’re better off chatting to a brick wall.
Neptune
Hall of Fame
Numbers and charts are not expressions of hatred; I suppose the truth can be painful.
B
Beerus
Guest
Federer should be overall ahead statistically, but 2 fewer Slams hurt his case a lot.
Aestheticsaboveallelse
Legend
Stats isn't a debate Djokovic is THE stat winner no question but stats don't tell the whole story
Aestheticsaboveallelse
Legend
The disconnect is you think stats mean everything, yes Djokovic won the stats race he's a super consistent machine
Aestheticsaboveallelse
Legend
Nadal's extreme getting dominated by them off clay more than makes up for it with his 0-6 last six vs Federer hard and grass as well as his no sets won vs Djokovic hard court in over 10 years. I mean come on hes completely uncompetitive
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
The last chapter of Nadal’s book is yet to be written. Let’s see how his career stacks up against Federer after he is retired. Right now a case can be made for either player being #2 in tennis history depending on how much you value Slam/Masters titles vs ATP Finals/Weeks at #1. To me, the H-H record is a tiebreaker in favor of Nadal. Also for me the unbelievable dominance of Nadal on clay courts is a positive rather than a negative to be discounted.
I would think that the book is closed on who is #1 though as it is more likely that Djokovic will keep winning more important titles and break more records compared to Nadal as he seems to take care of his body better.
I would think that the book is closed on who is #1 though as it is more likely that Djokovic will keep winning more important titles and break more records compared to Nadal as he seems to take care of his body better.
Wait - Djokovic isn’t in the thread.
How to include?…..
Ummm - maybe put asterisk era comment 1000th time.
#rentfree
All that’s there in pro tennis matters. Some matter more, some less. But it all matters.
Unless you want to keep it simple for yourself.
Razer
Legend
Most people only look at slams.... and then H2H and rank 1 stats...
I have never seen anyone talk of masters tournaments.... maybe in the countries where they were held it must be a big deal but not outside them.
Phoenix*
Professional
Most people don't know what a slam is. They look at #1 because everyone knows what number 1 means.
From a larger perspective for a common man - yes slams probably is be all - end all.
But for a serious fan of tennis - who understands the game, follows the game. It all matters.
Eventually atp tour is a very very long tour with 11 months of tennis. Not just 8 weeks of slams.
And undermining masters - which are really big tournaments and wtf - which has the highest prize money for the winner amongst any tournament including slams is not a right view in my opinion.
Even olympics matter. If Djokovic doesn’t win one gold there - it’s a hole in his resume. Without a doubt. He too knows it. He literally put CYGS on the line in ‘21 for gold in olympics. Though he didn’t win both in the end.
But it all matters.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Common man don't know anything. Its what tennis fans will tell them that they will repeat.
Thankfully tennis slam leader also leads all other stats and right now what we are telling our friends matters.
I agree on that. Media houses define what common man knows about a sport like tennis.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Exactly, we define the discourse. That's what I know.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
People who dont know what slams are, are no Fans of tennis, everyone with even a passing interest will know. A guy who never ever watched Football will just by terminology also think being number one in the FIFA World Ranking is a bigger achievement than winning the World Cup but will be laughed out of the room for that by any serious connoisseur.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Serious tennis fans will understand all things tennis.
We had an era in 2003 to 2008 where Fed won 12 slams and Nadal won 5. Nadal was catching up on masters and his fans vehemently said H2H are only things that matter. In those days, Rafa could not even reach a slam final on hc. Later Rafa started winning on HC then he had a young rival who started beating him, so they said only slams masters and h2h matter.
All this time, he never ever challenged supremacy for number 1. So his fans never respected other records, only the records that he held.
We see slams rafa is ahead
number 1 fed is ahead
masters rafa is ahead but rafa has 3 clay masters a year and roger has 0 grass masters a year
The nadal lead in slams is not even a lot. its 2 and a sizeble portion of fans think its not 2, but 1. but federer is ahead of nadal in 3 slams. so even in slams its not clear cut.
We had an era in 2003 to 2008 where Fed won 12 slams and Nadal won 5. Nadal was catching up on masters and his fans vehemently said H2H are only things that matter. In those days, Rafa could not even reach a slam final on hc. Later Rafa started winning on HC then he had a young rival who started beating him, so they said only slams masters and h2h matter.
All this time, he never ever challenged supremacy for number 1. So his fans never respected other records, only the records that he held.
We see slams rafa is ahead
number 1 fed is ahead
masters rafa is ahead but rafa has 3 clay masters a year and roger has 0 grass masters a year
The nadal lead in slams is not even a lot. its 2 and a sizeble portion of fans think its not 2, but 1. but federer is ahead of nadal in 3 slams. so even in slams its not clear cut.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Lol. If with sizeable portion you mean some bitter hater in online forums then yes.
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
magnus carlsen is not a bitter hater online.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Not a tennis expert either. You have his exact quote?
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
He says implicitly that Fed is "probably" ahead of Nadal even with 20 vs 22 nowhere does he say that AO 22 should not count and Ned would only be one ahead. I have no issues with putting Fed ahead, both are very close. I personally have Nadal ahead though also because of the two slam lead.
D
Dwell
Guest
I used to say say Rafa, but the perpetual excellence of Rolex timepieces, combined with the smoothness of Lindt Tablette Maitre Chocolatier and the character of Moët & Chandon Nectar Imperial Rosé showed me that Roger is way ahead.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
This right here. Imagine relying on non-fans of the sport’s ignorance as an argument for who’s the more accomplished player, and thinking you made a point.
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
It's interesting how he likens himself more to Nadal, presumably due to his tenacious approach to long drawn out positions, but his air of arrogance, capacity to make the game look easy/intuitive, lack of BS, proficiency in faster conditions and general nobility towards the game absolutely reek of Fed.
Razer
Legend
You are a troll, most people know that, I think that is enough, no?
Last edited:
cb4_89
New User
These are weird because most objective fans will just pick Djokovic. And then you have the Federistas and Nadalistas who will pick their guy no matter what Djokovic (or anybody) ever does. When you eliminate Djokovic as an option, the objective fans along with the Djokeristas who would pick Novak even if the careers with say Nadal were reversed) have to pick one of the other two. Tennis is split amongst "slams are all" and "its a combo of slams and weeks as #1 and other achievements". Almost everyone views slams as MUCH more important than any other tournament, so a two slam lead weighs very heavy against many weeks and WTFs. Nadal also has a gold medal and a MASSIVE head to head advantage against Fed.
Personally I think its super close. 2 slams, a gold and a massive head to head vs 100 weeks and 6 WTFs is what it boils down to. A year ago I fully expected Nadal to add at least 2 more slams by the end of it, in which case it would be Nadal for me, but thats up in the air now. I'm not the only one sort of stuck in no mans land when it comes to Nadal vs Fed. There are legitimate arguments for both guys and I can see both sides. Neither has done enough to distance themselves from the other. Even 1 more slam for Nadal is still in this no mans land territory but closer to Nadal.
Razer
Legend
Masters, WTF, 500, 250 etc etc are all factored in Weeks at 1/Year end 1. So if along with Slams if you talk of rank1 stats then that will be enough. The Slams people highlight more because it is best of 5 and the biggest tournaments which people watch and follow. Proper fans of the game will discuss other factors too, yes but if you are discussing tennis to a common person or you wanna talk of the greatness of players with common people in real life (casual fans) you might have to only discuss 3 things ... Slams, H2H and rank 1 stats. Rest of the deeper stats most people wont be interested.
By the way, the olympics is nonsense, just an exhibition level for Tennis. It is known for non tennis events, not tennis. Djokovic's obsession with Olympics is cringe and annoying on many levels.
Last edited:
nolefam_2024
Talk Tennis Guru
Olympics is separate issue from GOAT issue.
Slams H2H and number 1 are good criterias. But in this case Federer leads in all non clay stats. And Nadal overwhelmingly leads in clay stats.
What it shows us is Nadal is clay specialist with good success on non clay events. While Fed is dominant force on all surfaces, but had issues just with Nadal.
If we think about it, it was not just Fedkovic who stopped Nadal at Wimbledon. He lost a total of what, 5 matches vs both combined and won 1. Hey come on. Federer himself lost 6 matches to Nadal at RG. Fed also played Djokovic 2 times in RG.
Federer does have huge black mark against Nadal h2h though. That we can't remove. Its 24-16 and maybe that's where it will go to Nadal. Fed didn't succeed beating Nadal. It was very poor 23-10 at one point and we can't make any excuse because Fed was 5 years older so it should have gone the other way. Fed winning 6 matches in next 7 is strange development and it shows that Federer probably missed big chance to win in his prime.
Novak can lag Nadal H2H, no issues because Novak is younger. Younger guy takes time to get evened out. Fed lagging Nadal he had no excuse. I am changing my vote to Nadal.
Slams H2H and number 1 are good criterias. But in this case Federer leads in all non clay stats. And Nadal overwhelmingly leads in clay stats.
What it shows us is Nadal is clay specialist with good success on non clay events. While Fed is dominant force on all surfaces, but had issues just with Nadal.
If we think about it, it was not just Fedkovic who stopped Nadal at Wimbledon. He lost a total of what, 5 matches vs both combined and won 1. Hey come on. Federer himself lost 6 matches to Nadal at RG. Fed also played Djokovic 2 times in RG.
Federer does have huge black mark against Nadal h2h though. That we can't remove. Its 24-16 and maybe that's where it will go to Nadal. Fed didn't succeed beating Nadal. It was very poor 23-10 at one point and we can't make any excuse because Fed was 5 years older so it should have gone the other way. Fed winning 6 matches in next 7 is strange development and it shows that Federer probably missed big chance to win in his prime.
Novak can lag Nadal H2H, no issues because Novak is younger. Younger guy takes time to get evened out. Fed lagging Nadal he had no excuse. I am changing my vote to Nadal.
Aestheticsaboveallelse
Legend
What most people look at doesnt matter. Most people arent even aware of the slams and most people dont watch any tennis
Agreed. It’s all factored in and matters eventually.
Regarding olympics - it’s still considered a big title by ATP. Too far away from exhibition. I am a Djokovic fan, but a hole in a resume is a hole.
He though is still GOAT just by the numbers without an iota of doubt.
Razer
Legend
How is it a hole ?
Let imagine a scenario where Wimbledon is held once in 4 years
2001 2005 2009 2013 2017 2021
Voila ... now slam counts are
Federer - 3
Murray - 1
Ivanisevic - 1
Djokovic - 1
Nadal - 0
Is this how greatness on Grass looks like in reality ? Any tourney held once in 4 years is not a hole, it is a fluke.
DIMI_D
Hall of Fame
Nadal beat Novak 2007 Wimby
Won twice
GoatNo1
Professional
you forgot WTFs (6-0) and indoors. fed is clearly greater at 2 out of 3 surfaces + indoors.
rafa has OG and an asterisked DCGS.
that it is msters on clay and not at grass das not matter. both knowed how the tour was made when they begin with tennis. that are players who should adapt their play to the tour not vece versa.
Last edited:
It's not a big hole because its held in 4 years. Agreed on that bit. But it's a hole - given he has still played it 5 times!
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Djokovic should be included in this thread, but the OP disrespect Djokovic since he's part of the big 3.
Who ranked #1-3 between these 3 is a matter of opinion
Similar threads
- Poll
