If Rnadal surpasses Rfederer in slam count,will he be considered the greatest ever?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by tusharlovesrafa, Jul 8, 2013.

?

If Rnadal surpasses Rfederer in slam count,will he be considered the greatest ever?

  1. yes

    30.6%
  2. yes

    1.4%
  3. yes

    0.7%
  4. yes

    1.4%
  5. yes

    4.2%
  6. yes

    2.8%
  7. yes

    1.4%
  8. yes

    0.7%
  9. yes

    3.5%
  10. no

    53.5%
  1. TheTruth

    TheTruth G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,672
    Great article. I agree, their rivalry was amazing. I have never seen anything like it before. I hope it isn't over either. Just watching their contrast and unbelievable shots and gets:::sigh.
     
  2. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686
    Nice comments from Fed. Hopefully he can get it together, and Nadal can get bionic knees so this rivalry can get going again.
     
  3. Crisstti

    Crisstti Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,262
    Location:
    Chile
    Exactly.

    And lol at people claiming Nadal had to be on his prime since 2005 since he won a slam. And yet Fed wasn't in his prime in 2008.

    And of course you can say some competition is tougher than other.
     
  4. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,191
    No because Roger isn't the "greatest ever". At least doesn't have the "greatest resume".

    That feat belongs to Laver, Pancho or Rosewall.

    If Nadal can do:

    1. 2 calendars (like Laver)
    2. 200 Tournaments (like Laver)
    3. 6-8 years as Number 1 player in the world (Like Sampras, Federer, Pancho)
    4. 20 slam title equivalents (like Rosewall)
    5. 5 or 6 YEC. (Like Federer and Sampras)
    6. SIX year end #1s (like Sampras)

    And maintain the h2h advantage over ALL main rivals....than he will be regarded as hands down the greatest ever.. If he doesn't do at least MOST of these things then he will just be in the argument for greatest ever. Greatest of the open era maybe.. But we are talking ALL TIME here
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2013
  5. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,870
    Why? Remember, Fed fans are in majority. And Rafa fans don't even consider Fed the goat with 5 more majors and 200 more weeks being nr.1.

    What makes you think Fed fans will consider Rafa greater with 1 more major?
    It will be payback time if it comes that far.

    Imagine how would you feel Rafa having 22 majors and 500 weeks nr.1 and still not being considered the goat.

    That is what some of Nadal fans do. So Fed fans will unleash anger for all the years of abuse.
     
  6. THUNDERVOLLEY

    THUNDERVOLLEY G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,260
    All so accurate.
     
  7. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    uncle toni says he's winning the USO so that's 1 closer to 20 and possibly 1 more year end #1.
     
  8. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    preach! pancho, laver, rosewall forever.
     
  9. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    *WHEN
    yes, yes he will
     
  10. Candide

    Candide Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    969
    Location:
    Yabba, the greatest little place on Earth
    You run the risk of being banished from this place by posting logical and balanced posts. This is the place for smearing yourself in Spanish Fly and monkey gland and howling at the moon. Didn't you get the memo?
     
  11. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Once again, you fail to understand. In 2005 and 2006 Rafa was only a great player on clay. Once 2007 came along he was great on clay and grass. Then 2008 came along and he improved his HC game by then.
     
  12. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Before I buzz off, I will explain, Nadal played crap against Darcis and deserved to lose. Against Rosol he was hampered by his left knee which was evident by the three injection marks.

    It's not something that really bothers me though, Federer has lost early in majors a lot more times than Nadal has.
     
  13. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Anybody with a decent pair of eyeballs who's been watching tennis will say that Novak, Federer and Murray is tougher to beat than Hewitt, Roddick and old Agassi. You're in denial.

    You say crap like you like Hewitt and Roddick's chances against 31 year old Fed, yet you forget that Nadal, Djokovic and Murray defeated PEAK Federer when they were teens, something that Roddick and Hewitt failed to do in their peak and miserably I might add...

    All rubbish excuses.

    Nadal would've won more if he was peak during 04-07, give me a break a 35 year old cripple made it to the US Open final ffs, as if that would've happened over the past 5 years LMFAO.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2013
  14. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    to be fair, nadal lost in the second round of wimby a couple weeks after his 26th birthday, and the first round when he was 27.



    yet at 26, 27 federer won 3 slams. nole and murray both hit their stride around 26.
    nadal is a special cookie.
     
  15. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    this is as much a testament to how good agassi was as it is a testament to murray and djokovic's inability to dominate the tour and rack up slams( as opposed to masters) at an early age despite already having an edge over the post-borg goat.

    honestly, agassi at 35 had better groundstrokes than both murray and djokovic. that alone would bode pretty well on the fast courts of the USO.
     
  16. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Yeah Agassi breezed his way through to that final, his groundstrokes were so good he even beat Ginepri in 5 sets! No way is Novak or Murray going to get through Ginepri with their inferior groundstrokes...

    Federer has lost in the first round of his own pet slam, on THREE occasions. I don't see the big deal if Nadal loses in his second best major in the first round only once. Sure he was 27 but, he hadn't played on grass for a whole year and you don't always judge the level of play on age, you judge it on what they produce and Nadal produced crap that day and deserved to lose.
     
  17. Eragon

    Eragon Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    716
    Location:
    Alagaesia
    You do realize that it was the same "weak era mugs" that were dropping Nadal, after he won his first Slam, out of tournaments back in the so-called weak era? Blake and Davydenko, who Federer owns, embarrassed Nadal on many occasions. If you call them weak, what would you call Nadal? And don't give me the "baby Nadal" rubbish. He'd already won a Slam and Masters 1000 titles on Hardcourts.
     
  18. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    i dont care either way, i just thought you could use a counter argument. i still stand by my comment that agassi had a better forehand and backhand than djok and murr, and ones more especially suited for the USO to boot.
     
  19. 6-3 6-0

    6-3 6-0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages:
    1,562
    Location:
    Fedal era
    A player's legacy is not made up by losses, but by wins. The answer was directly in reply to your pathetic trolling attempt.
    Besides TNadal has himself said he was exactly the same in SDarcis match as he was in RG. Now tell me you know more than his coach LOL :lol:

    If it doesn't bother you, why do you keep trolling around?
     
  20. Eragon

    Eragon Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    716
    Location:
    Alagaesia
    It's funny how you include Federer, Djokovic and Murray as Nadal's competition but don't include Nadal, Djokovic and Murray as Federer's competition. I wonder why people even respond to such an obvious troll and dunderhead as you.
     
  21. 6-3 6-0

    6-3 6-0 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages:
    1,562
    Location:
    Fedal era
    You gimme a break!! To countee your argument, RNadal started winning slams on HC when RFederer was past his prime (not to mention his mono) and then suddenly stopped when another HC player peaked, no? :lol:
     
  22. THE FIGHTER

    THE FIGHTER Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,441
    oh yeah, murray needed 7-5 in the fifth to get past Tobasco on his route to his maiden Wimby title. and novak went to 5 against some guys too, including the formidable Seppi. so, yeah stats are fun.
     
  23. Eragon

    Eragon Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    716
    Location:
    Alagaesia
    In the so-called strong era (2011 and onward), Nadal has won 3 French Opens, Federer 1 Wimbledon. Djokovic is the GOAT, because quality is greater than quantity. 6>12>17 :lol:
     
  24. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,090
    Yet Djokovic was extended to 5 sets by Seppi at the French, to 5 sets by Wawrinka at the AO. Murray was extended to 5 sets by Verdasco the grass god.

    If being extended to 5 sets by a less than first class player is an indicator of somebody being a bum, then the level of the current top 2 players isn't really.

    Might be that sometime, less than first class players are able to play at a first class level, though.

    I don't know why you gave yourself the mission to spit on Agassi, Hewitt and Roddick like you do. These players had their shortcomings, but today's players have some too. I still don't understand could play so erratically in the RG SF, unable to come the net at the right time or hit one single overhead. And the Wimbledon and AO finals weren't demonstrations of top notch tennis.
     
  25. Eragon

    Eragon Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    716
    Location:
    Alagaesia
    Nadal fan logic:

    Nadal gets stretched to 5 sets - Strong Era!

    Federer gets stretched to 5 sets - The mug choked!

    Djokovic and Murray get stretched to 5 sets - Strong Era!

    Federer wins in 3 or 4 sets - Weak Era!

    Federer's opponents come through in 5 sets - Played like a mug, lucky to get through, fatigued to death! Cake draw!
     
  26. Candide

    Candide Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    969
    Location:
    Yabba, the greatest little place on Earth
    Like their hero Nadal bullster fans are nothing if not consistent. And repetitive. And boring.
     
  27. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,090
    In their defense, the result of this poll is appalling. Throw the achievements list to close the pointless H2H argument, deny that Nadal would be the greatest if he could top the said achievements list.
     
  28. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,870
    Well, that is your opinion. But it is not based on good reasoning. I hope you are aware of that.

    But yes, if Nadal had more slams than Fed he would've been greater. I can agree with you on this one.

    So, you are saying Nadal is greater than Fed because he would've won more in Feds era.

    Well, I can accept your opinion, no matter how crazy it seems to me. But I don't agree with it. I say we can only use reality scenarios.

    What excuses do I even need? Fed has all important records. I don't even mind people break them. But you can't ignore reality and I don't agree with your line of reasoning.
     
  29. swedenparty

    swedenparty Rookie

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Messages:
    238
    Well if he wins another 6 FOs(or 5 +1) probably no, but if he has variety then probably yes.
     
  30. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    LOL at the brigade or should I say Fed fringe members all getting worked up over some things I posted on a forum. LOL you all lead sad lives and the truth really burns you.

    Agassi didn't just get extended to 5 by Ginepri, if you actually watched the tournament you would know that. If you knew anything about Agassi,you would also know that he was born with a spine condition that really hampered him as he got older.

    When Nadal and Novak were Fed's main competition he stopped winning majors as frequently as he was when they weren't. LOL Eragon you really are challenged to say the least.
     
  31. monfed

    monfed Guest

    You also started saying "Federer fringe"? :lol:

    BTW have you seen the TV show Fringe? It's a rip-off of X-files,think you'll like that too.
     
  32. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    20,988
    LOL..the Nadal fanboys are getting worked up because Nadal playing catch up while Fed is widely considered goat.:)


    You have no idea how Agassi was playing in 2005 USO, who even said likes his chance against anyone even Pete. Recalling his 5th set encounter with Ginepri is strawman, that's like saying 2009 AO Nadal was pushed to a 5th set by Verdasco. Agassi would have been a nightmare for Nadal because of his great bh would neutralize Nadal fh topspin. Just because Federer beat Agassi you automatically assumed he's weak, or Nadal would have beaten him too. Yeah right. 2005 Agassi would have a much better chance against Nadal than Federer. Agassi ground game >> Verdasco ground game.
     
  33. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Excellent analysis, agree 100%.
     
  34. Incognito

    Incognito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,953
    keep deluding yourself that Agassi was great in 2005. He lost to baby Nadal in canada in the final that year lol. Agassi could barely move in 2005 for crying out loud.
     
  35. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    20,988
    The_oder makes a lot of assumption. He think Agassi is weak because he can't beat Federer. I'm sure he would never believe Davydenko would owned Nadal 6-1 on hard court had they never met, because Fed owned Davydenko on hc, then Nadal automatically would owned Davy too. It's very likely that Agassi vs Nadal would be even more of a nightmare matchup than it is for Davy vs Nadal.
     
  36. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    20,988
    I'm talking about the USO, why cherry pick certain match?

    I can cherry pick a match for Nadal in 2010 when he lost to old Ljubicic in IW.

    And don't ignore match up problem. Davydenko gives Nadal problems because he rob Nadal's timing by taking the ball on the rise. Well, if you know Agassi, he's great at taking the ball on the rise. Capiche ?
     
  37. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Agassi would've been a nightmare for Ralph ESPECIALLY on the 2005 USO surface, the court was lightning quick and he takes the ball on the rise and has arguably the greatest BH of all time, Ralph's topspin FH would be very effectively blunted by the Agassi BH.
     
  38. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Very true couldn't agree more.
     
  39. Incognito

    Incognito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,953
    Prime Agassi would present enourmous problems for Nadal, no doubt about that, with his ability to hit the ball flat and on the rise. 2005 agassi is no prime though, 34-35 year old with a bad back.

    Maybe you don't know Agassi that well. Even in his younger days, he wasn't that great of a mover. Imagine him 34-35 year old in 2005 with a bad back :shock: At 35, he could barely get to Nadal's "moonballs".

    With Davydenko, you're forgetting he can run just as fast as Nadal and could defend well, it's not only because he can take the ball on the rise that he beats Nadal.
     
  40. Incognito

    Incognito Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,953
    lol at TMF and Monfed glorifying old Agassi with a bad back.


    As a Rafa fan, I admit Agassi was old and basically a cripple when Rafa beat him in the Toronto final of 2005 just weeks before the USO. TMF and Monfed make it sound as if Agassi was a player on the rise when fed beat him lol.
     
  41. mike danny

    mike danny Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,992
    The_Order you are not always right. nadal would not automatically win all the majors federer won between 2004-2007.
    federer got past players like nalbandian and davydenko who are very tough match-ups for nadal. there is no guarantee nadal would beat them. also roddick at wimbledon. there is no guarantee nadal would beat him in 2004 the way he was playing. even us open 2006 would be no guarantee. he would have to go through both blake and davydenko tough match-ups for him on hards. hewitt would not be a walkover either. there are some slams nadal would not be guaranteed to win
     
  42. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,068
    It would be pretty amazing if Nadal was still winning the French Open 6 years from now. I don't think he will win any more of the other majors, though he certainly is still a contender.
     
  43. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    20,988
    Don't judge Agassi's entire 2005, but just the USO alone. He was playing great tennis plus having a home court advantage. No one would judge Sampras's 2002 USO performance based on the entire year, but that single tournament alone he was playing great tennis. Also, don't forget USO hard court condition would favor Agassi over Nadal, which is his worst surface.
     
  44. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Did I say he'd def win all of them? I don't recall saying that.

    Here's what he'd win imo if he was 21 turning 22 in 2004 and free of injury:

    AO04: Nalbandian is the only threat here, but I'd fancy Nadal's chances over him. Hewitt, Ferrero and tired Safin would all fall victim to him.

    RG04: Don't need to discuss this.

    WIM04: Roddick would be very tough for him on this day. To give the benefit of the doubt, I'll give this one to Roddick.

    US04: old Agassi, Henman and Hewitt. Rafa would win this one.

    AO05: Maybe Safin would beat him. Very tough call, but once again, I'll give Safin the benefit of the doubt here.

    RG05:

    WIM05: Rafa would win this one.

    US05: Rafa would win this one.

    AO06: Again Rafa would win it.

    RG06:

    WIM06: He'd win it. (cue abmk saying Ancic would beat him :lol:)

    US06: At his peak, I think he'd win it. But let's just say he loses this one.

    AO07: Win.

    RG07:

    WIM07: win

    US07: Novak would probably cause him problems but he'd still end up winning it.
     
  45. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Great tennis? LOL sorry but Agassi playing great tennis doesn't struggle in 5 sets against Malisse, Blake and Ginepri that's rubbish.
     
  46. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    20,988
    And that holds true for prime Nadal struggled in 5 sets against Isner, Verdasco, Petzschner. Not to mention he lost to Rosol and Darcis.

    Keep cherry picking, it can backfire you !
     
  47. -RF-

    -RF- Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2,212
    Location:
    London
    As a federer fan I regret to say that the answer would have to be yes.

    But will Nadal win 6 more slams?

    LOL
     
  48. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    No, Laver, Rosewall, Gonzalez and Tilden would still be greater.
     
  49. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    by you maybe. Tilden played in a weak era and Rosewall had a 0-5 record in Wimbledon finals. True experts cannot overlook these facts!
     
  50. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,038
    Yeah but I'm not being delusional saying Nadal was playing great tennis in those matches. Only the Verdasco match was he playing great and the reason it was an epic is because Verdasco also delivered on that day. He played better than Safin in AO05.

    You otoh, are delusional saying a cripple 35 year old Agassi was playing great tennis when he was constantly struggling against guys he would routine in straights if he was playing great tennis you tool.
     

Share This Page