How can Nadal be a GOAT candidate if...

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Mike Sams, Oct 1, 2012.

  1. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,201
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    You do realize he's 31 years old now right. And as I said before GOAT does not mean you own everyone it means your more successful than everyone and fed has the best resume. So even if he cant win 17 with todays competition it doesnt matter cause he has 17 no matter what. And Nadal never met him in the hardcourt slams when federer was in HIS prime. Imagine if nadal met fed in 2007 final on rebound ace. He wouldve gotten beaten SO BADLY!!! but no it never happened. So basically he beats someone who is 5 years older to him on plexicushion on a surface that suits him more so federer cannot be GOAT :rolleyes:
     
  2. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,549
    Yeah, it would almost be ugly if he was in his prime now. At least, the Safins, Roddicks, Hewitts, and Nalbandians put up some fight at the time. I don't even want to imagine what a circa 2006-Federer would have done with "today's competition". Win a couple of calendar grand slams in a row, maybe... :roll:
     
  3. Evan77

    Evan77 Banned

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,745
    hmm, Roddick is Fed's turkey, lost like what 20 matches, won 2 if I remember correctly. doesn't belong in that 'list'. and no, no Calendar GS. He would still need to deal with Nadal etc.
     
  4. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    That's what goat may mean to you and I respect it.

    However that's not at all what it means to me and I ask you to respect that as well.

    To me the greatest player that ever lived means that no one else could beat them. It's really simple.

    Yes Federer is 31 today and its incredible . The man has not lost a step. He is as great as he ever was . In fact he says he is playing the best tennis of his life.

    Furthermore , Federer at 31 is I'm far better shape than Nadal is at 26.

    Nadal has in my opinion done far more in reality than Federer. Nadal has won more with less opportunies. He has won 11 slams but skipped I think 6 plus the Olympics.

    By coincidence the number of slams Federer has is also 6 more than Nadal but at 31 he has never missed a slam an has had way more opportunities . Fed has even had more opportunities at the Olympics but never could win .

    Add to that Nadal has beaten Fed in slams on grass and hard while Federer has not even come close to touching Nadal at the FO.

    Yeah Fed has his 17 on paper but that's all he has over Nadal.....nothing else. Feds 17 slams mainly happened becaise he avoided Nadal.

    This is the first time in history that the number one is dominated by his main rival......so you really can't use generalities like most slams becaise this situation is an exception to the general rule.

    And it's a pretty glaring exception. Federer has been very fortunate in his career to avoid Nadal......very fortunate indeed.
     
  5. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    He has always lost to Nadal....even when Nadal was a young developing player at 18 years old.
     
  6. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,808
    1. The Olympics mean NOTHING compared to the Grand Slams as far as achievement in Tennis goes.

    2. Federer is NOT playing his best Tennis? Have you, like, started watching Tennis in late 2010?

    3. Davydenko and Rosol have winning head-to-heads against Nadal. So he can't be the GOAT by your logic.

    4. Federer's got 17 Slams. 17. Seventeen. Seven... teen... That is all.
     
  7. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    1- maybe to you the Olympics mean nothing . But they mean a lot to a lot of other people.

    2- Federer says he is playing the best tennis of his life . Your argument is with him not me.

    3- davydenko and Rosol are on paper head to head . Again you take the simplistic view . For example Davydenko has never played Nadal on anything but a hardcourt . Furthermore all the matches are a best of the three. And there's a difference of a ba match up like Rosol. Thy happens once in a blue moon .....but Nadal was beating everyone including Federer. It's not some weird thing that happens once in a blue moon.

    4- 17 slams....yup that's all you got. An on paper and a robotic view your right. But a deeper more intellectual approach show that he got a majority of those slams by avoiding Nadal in some way.
     
  8. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,201
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Agreed!! ok I see your point!
     
  9. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  10. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,808
    1. You agree it isn't worth the same as a Slam, right?

    2. Federer said he was playing "some" of his best Tennis, which means just that. Some. In bursts. Not consistently.

    3. Nadal still lost to Rosol. And bringing up the HC argument is ironic coming from you, when you keep bringing up the Nadal-Federer head-to-head who've played half their matches on Clay.

    4. And 24 Slam finals (including 5 at every Slam). And 6 YE championships, 2 of them in Djokovic's and Nadal's primes. And 23 consecutive SFs. And over 300 weeks at #1 :lol: Since Nadal's first Slam, Federer has won 13 Slams. And a 4-0 record against Nadal on indoor Hards. A triple-surface Bagel on Nadal. A 2-1 lead at Wimbledon. And he never lost to the Rosol. Seriously, what are you on about?
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  11. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    Fed...avoid Nadal. Really? Back to the comparo that I asked. Where was Rafa when Fed won against Hewitt, Safin, and other supposedly weak players? Oh, I remember. Rafa skipped here, skipped there, injured here, injured there, still wore development diapers. Who was avoiding who?
     
  12. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,549
    You should tray and learn:
    - what "always" means
    - what the results of tennis matches are

    So, to recap, Nadal *has* always lost to Rosol, but Federer is far from having always lost to Nadal.
     
  13. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    He avoided having to play Rafa for one reason or another through no fault of his own.

    But the facts are the facts . He simply has been dominated by Rafa and his 17 slams came mainly by not having to deal with Rafa for one reason or another.

    If you just want to add up the slams and declare that Fed is the goat then you are absolutely right.

    However for me it's a far more complicated issue than simply adding up the numbers in a robotic fashion.

    I just cannot logically call someone the greatest player that ever lived when he keeps losing to someone . It just defys logic .
     
  14. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Nadal beat Federer in their very first meeting on a hardcourt . So yes Nadal has been beating Federer since their very first meeting ....for Nadals entire career he has always Dominated Federer. Yet somehow Federer is better than Nadal? How does that make sense?
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  15. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,808
    Yeah, I'm sure you do :)
     
  16. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,808
    Ohhhh, right. When that "first meeting" happens, let me know.
     
  17. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    Nah. Always = clay, clay clay clay ... to the infinity. Results= RG preferably. In no case, WTF or HC or grass. Too biaised,no?
     
  18. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    All Nadal has over Federer is more or less clay and his record 241 weeks at nr. 2.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  19. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,549
    It does when you understand how professional tennis works.
     
  20. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Except that's not true . Nadal beat him in the greatest match of all time on Feds best surface .....grass. Then at the AO which is hard court.
     
  21. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    I guess I'm pretty simple . Someone beats me continually in finals then I think he is better than me.
     
  22. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Nadal beat Fed on Nadals worst surfaces hardcourt and grass....by contrast Fed never even came close to beating Nadal on clay 6-1,-6-0 , 6-3.....

    So Nadal is better all around.
     
  23. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    He ( Fed) avoided... No, he didn't. He was in these GS finals.Where was Rafa? Funny how you understand the meaning of "avoid". FYI, it was RAfa. DO NOT twist things around to sui your purposes.
     
  24. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,808
    Federer bageled Nadal on Clay.
     
  25. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    So Djoker must SO FAR AHEAD of Rafa based on his results in GS finals last year, right? What was it again, 3-0?
     
  26. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    Keep spinning. You'll understand one day.
     
  27. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    He does. Logic=TDK
     
  28. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    No but GS is all that counts. Oops Federer has more of them. Well it does not count, because Nadal did not show up in the finals.
     
  29. VPhuc tennis fan

    VPhuc tennis fan Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    948
    Nah, Fed just avoided him, such a loser!:)
     
  30. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,808
    Yep, Federer has made 24 Grand Slam finals and he's so talented that he planned his finals so he wouldn't have to face Nadal there :)
     
  31. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,715
    You mean at Hamburg? Nadal was so tired he could not hold his racket in that third set.
     
  32. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,195
    Nadal is rapidly approaching GOAT candidacy. (If hes not considered that already)

    11 slams
    Career Grand Slam
    #1 in the world
    Has owned another GOAT candidate his whole career
    positive h2h with his main rivals
    Already hands down GOAT on clay


    Hes just missing a YEC and perhaps a bit of a longer stint at #1

    But hes accomplished everything there is just about and did so before he was 26-27 years old.. Thats enough for GOAT consideration. Anyone who says otherwise is clueless. The guy has a GOAT-like Resume

    If people consider someone like Borg a GOAT candidate for instance, how the hell can't you consider Nadal? Nadal has already surprised Borg IMO. He's just trailing behind a few other guys like Laver, Pancho, Tilden, Rosewall, Fed, and Sampras. All GOAT candidates themselves. But one of those (Federer) he has owned his whole career

    If Nadal can just get maybe 2 more slams (preferably off of clay) his GOAT candidacy should be universal
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  33. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Of course not. It's through no fault of his own.

    He is clearly a goat and would win slams in any era and will continue to do so. In fact he was my pick to win Wimbledon.

    But the only thing you guys hang your hat on is Feds 17 slams......like that should automatically make him the goat.

    It's never been about the number of slams. If it were them Emerson would be considered greater than Laver if it were then Borg would be considered greater than Mcenroe .

    The answers has never been so cut and dry . Certainly 17 slams adds to Federers argument . It's a gigantic feat.......but I don't think that automatically means he is the goat.

    The fact that Nadal dominates him is a huge problem for Federer. I'm sorry but you can't say he is the greatest player that has ever lived when in front of our eyes he is just utterly dominated .

    We have never had a situation like this before. Laver , Mcenroe, Lendl, Sampras all dominated their opponents.

    But when the alleged greatest player that ever lived gets beaten on his favorite surface , gets beaten on his equally greatest surface ( hard) and loses 6-3,6-1,6-0 at the French and dominated like I believe four other times at the FO......it gets really difficult to say he is the greatest player that ever lived .

    There is Nadal who beats the crap out of Federer in front of your eyes. How can you just ignore that???

    Does Federer have the greatest record of all time : YES......but does that mean he is the greatest player that ever lived ? I say no.....and so do a heck of a lot of other people.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  34. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Just by analogy ..,,

    Jankovic ,Azerenka ,Safina all ranked as the best players earth....#1 in the world . Their records were better than Serena.....but were they really better? No way Serena beat them an was the better player even though her record was worse.

    I'll even go a step further.....I don't know the numbers but I think Grafs numbers were better than Serena's..... I personally think Serena is a better player. In fact ill go as far as saying that Serena Williams is the greatest female tennis player that ever lived
     
  35. Cup8489

    Cup8489 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    9,187
    Location:
    Silvis, IL
    Utterly dominated... must you continue to engage in hyperbole? Federer has won 10 matches of 28. That's not being utterly dominated. You're just exaggerating the effect it's had.. and it's not a correct way to make an argument. Federer has denied Nadal majors. That's not being dominated.. end of story.
     
  36. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    Radiohead has a great song, you'd probably like it, it's called "Nice Dream"
     
  37. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    History only looks at slams.

    How many tournaments did Noah win? All you remember is that he won the FO. No one remembers all history remembers is the slams. How many games during the season did the Yankees win? Who cares all that matters is the World Series .

    Any matches during the regular season are just that matches to determine your ranking for the slams. It's no different that being in 1st place in the Anerican league and making the World Series.

    Baseball has its World Series which consists of 7 games. Tennis has te slams which consists of four tournaments . The rest are all merely "regular season" matches to determine your ranking .

    The only slams Fed was able to beat Nadal on were grass....and that's when he was still labeled a clay court specialist . You can't call him a clay court specialist and then be surprised he lost on grass.

    In any event Nadal beat him on grass on hard and on clay.....that's domination in my book.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  38. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,112
    Um, you just blatantly contradicted yourself. How could slam H2H, a smaller scope of the big picture, ever mean more than total accomplishment and performance in slams? That's like saying it doesn't matter how many WS the Yankees won, but it is all about who won the WS when the Yanks played the D'backs. Because the WS is all that matters and where all the glory is. So I guess the D'backs are a better team than the Yanks. Since they showed up in 1997 they "dominated" the Yanks in the World Series in '01.
     
  39. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Not a good example.

    A better example would be is that before the diamondbacks the Yankees won 5 WS in a row. Then the diamond backs a brand new team entered the major leagues and lost to the yankess in the regular season.

    The diamond backs a rookie team actually make it to the World Series and barely lose.

    The very next year after their rookie season they beats the yanks in the WS and continue to beat the Yanks for the next 5 years.

    But then the diamond backs star pitcher gets injured and they don't make it to the series. The yanks end up beating the dodgers in the World Series that year.

    So the yanks have more World Series .....but who is really the better team?
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  40. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    No you just say it a heck of a lot of times.
     
  41. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    And it doesn't make you more right.
    "Unlucky, unlucky, oh yes," uncle Toni said. "If there wasn't Federer, perhaps Rafael would have been No. 1 for four years. But with Federer, that was impossible."
     
  42. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    By analogy that's what happened in tennis...

    Young Nadal beats Fed at wimby , then defends his title the next year and ten skips Wimbledon .

    Federer then wins wimby beat Roddick yet again for the same old story.
    Fed adds yet another slam in the records.

    Sort of a hollow win if you ask me.
     
  43. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Toni and Rafa are so respectful of Federer it's amazing .
     
  44. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    With good reason. It was Federer who was (and is) nr one for almost 6 years. A far bigger blemish on Nadals record than a loosing head to head on clay on Federers.
     
  45. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,112
    Federer was world #1 five times, Nadal twice, and Djokovic soon to be twice as well. Slams between the two best players aren't the only criteria. That ignores consistency, something Nadal doesn't have at the top of the game. A slam final is not the WS. There are four of them plus other points to be had, including a neat summary of all data, called the ranking, which shows who was the best player overall for that season. Nadal has dominated two tennis seasons, Federer five.
     
  46. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    Hillarious comming from a man who uses misrepresenting, Federers wifes weight and big fonts as arguments...
     
  47. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    Awwww come on that was a joke. I thought it was funny.
     
  48. The Dark Knight

    The Dark Knight Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,340
    It all depends on who is the Judge doesn't it?

    But history has already proven that slams are the only thing it remembers .

    Boris Becker is my favorite example. He is a goat by every ones standards. Yet he was never the year end #1 player in the world .

    It's actually sort of a trivia statistic because no one really cares. All they remember is that he is a multiple slam winner .

    But let's take the analogy further . Becke beat Lendl at Wimbledon and then beat him right after that at the US Open . And yet somehow Lendl was the #1 player in the world .

    No one agreed with it . There were tons of articles about it......why?? Because even though on paper Lendl was the better player everyone knew in reality Becker was the best player that year.

    He beat Lendl Mano a Mano in two consecutive slams.
    It's paper vs reality argument.
     
  49. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,743
    Oh, perhaps I am too deep and intellectual. And the misrepresenting and big fonts?
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2012
  50. Numenor

    Numenor Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2012
    Messages:
    245
    :lol: No GOAT candidate can be dominated 7 straight times across 3 different surfaces by his main rival. Too bad nadal had to wait until Novak's level decreased, was emotionally distraught, and on clay to finally end his losing streak.
     

Share This Page