Pros think Rafa is the GOAT

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by sureshs, Feb 11, 2013.

  1. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,981
    Location:
    U.S
    yes, it is ... roddick went 5-4 vs djokovic, including 8 sets in a row, beat him @ the AO, beat murray @ wimbledon, haas/safin beat djoker at wimbledon ..... davydenko owned nadal on HC 6-1 h2h etc etc ... these are ample indicators ....

    the only outlier has been djoker 2011, but even a past his prime federer handled him better than prime rafa did ....

    there's no universally accepted GOAT, correct ... but rafa's resume still falls way short of earning a claim ...
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2013
  2. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,757
    Who wants to? Stop misrepresenting.
     
  3. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    Exactly. Nobody is saying clay doesnt count, what people are saying is Rafa's results and achievments are heavily skewed towards clay i.e. his Master Shields, majors, match streaks etc.

    Thus,*taking clay away*, what in his record makes him Goatworthy? ETA: Just like I never felt that Sampras should be called GOAT even when he got the slam record as he was invisible on clay. Nadal is a reverse Sampras.

    But as for Fed, take away grass, Fed still has 10 majors, 5 in a row at the USO, 5 FO finals and 1 FO win, 6 WTF and probably still has record weeks at number 1 because the gap between 1 and 2 was so riculous for so long. He'd still be one slam away from setting the open era record of #of USO and AO titles

    Shoot, I saw a record yesterday I didnt even know he had.

    Fed is the only man in the open era to win at least 5 titles at 7 different tourneys.

    WB, USO, WTF, Cincy, Dubai, Halle and Basel.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  4. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,634
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Rafa was dominant in ONLY one slam. Pete may not have won RG but he was dominant in two slams. Pete also won WTF and was year end number one six times. There is a huge difference, if you just meant Pete by NOT winning RG
     
  5. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,132
    What a great man! Far out he's fantastic!

    Here's the thing, Nadal has done better on grass than what Federer has done on clay. He's got 2 Wimbledon titles to Fed's 1 RG (which he won without beating Nadal).

    As for HC, Fed won most of his HC titles with a weak field. His 4 AO titles have all come without facing a top 4 opponent (except for 2004 which was only JC Ferrero). If Nadal or Novak had those type of draws at the AO where they didn't have to face one of the top 4 they'd be winning them constantly. In fact Novak already has won everyone of his AO titles by facing at least one top 4 opponent.

    Fed's record at AO against top 4 opponents:

    1 Win (JC Ferrero)
    6 Losses (2 x Nadal, 2 x Novak, 1 x Murray, 1 x Safin)

    As for the US Open who was his competition up there from 2004-2008? 04 he faced old broken down Agassi and scraped through in 5 sets. He then had a walkover opponent in the final (Hewitt) who only showed up for the sake of it. In 2005 it was an even older Agassi and he'd just come off a multitude of 5 setters, and still gave Fed quite a tough match. In 2006 it was Roddick, his pidgeon. In 2007 he faced Novak who was making his slam final debut. In 2008 he faced Murray also making his slam final debut.

    Apart from RG05, Nadal has won every major against a player that has made at least one slam final before. No slam debutants for 10 of his 11 majors, and tbh it's unfair to count Puerta because it was also Nadal's slam final debut as well. Fed otoh, has faced a slam final debutant in RG09, US07, US08, AO06 and AO07.

    If Nadal was in his peak he would've beat all those HC opponents as well. Truth is Fed was quite lucky with the opponents he's had to face to win all of his HC titles as I've just pointed out. I can only see Roddick possibly troubling Nadal but I don't see him beating a prime Rafa up there.

    So Federer's achievements are heavily skewed as they have been against weaker opponents.
     
  6. Carsomyr

    Carsomyr Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,267
    Location:
    Winesburg, Ohio
    I must have missed where Berdych made a Slam final before Wimbledon '10.
     
  7. Talker

    Talker Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Messages:
    2,990
    Rafa racked up his slams against the same field Fed did.

    He also couldn't make even the slam HC finals for years against the same field.

    Nadal trailed Fed for years as #2 by wide margins against the same field.

    How can someone be #2 for so long with huge margins behind the #1 against the same field and have any claim to be as good?
     
  8. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,132
    Ah yes, very true.

    Did you see the way Berdych performed in his first slam final? On par with how Fed's first time slam final opponents played. The only odd one out was Delpo.

    Novak played well in 07 USO but nerves got to him in the TB's.

    But in any case, the point still stands that first time slam final opponents, more often than not, don't play their best level due to nerves. Fed still has far more favour in this category compared to Nadal.
     
  9. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,132
    Did Federer beat himself did he? He is an incredible player, extremely hard to beat in majors, which is why he was able to rack up so many titles. Rafa had to beat Federer to win most of his majors.

    How many HC slam finals did Federer make before he was 22? Rafa made his first HC slam final in AO09 when he was 22, same age Fed was when he made his first HC slam final. So to expect Nadal (who btw is not as good as Fed on HC) to perform better than Federer himself before he was 22 is stupid.

    What I just explained, that was the same reason Nadal was #2 for so long. Nadal is by far and away the greatest clay courter of all time. So much so that even when he was a teenager he was virtually unbeatable on the surface. This is why he was #2 for so long, but once he developed his game to play on grass and HC, he was then able to dethrone Federer at his best major. Fed never dethroned Nadal at RG and probably never will.

    Nadal was making HC and grass majors from 2010 through to AO2012, where was Federer?
     
  10. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    That's cuz didn't you know, rafa and fed are in different eras, lol
     
  11. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    Rofl....fed was also winning the wtf in 2010 and 2011, where was rafa?
    And you coniently leave out 2012 wimby that fed won and rafa got beat in the second round roflmao.

    What a joke
     
  12. The_Order

    The_Order Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    7,132
    Umm, Rafa played Fed in those tournaments. And yes he lost in 2010 but at least that was respectable, in 2011 he got belted. BUt the WTF doesn't matter anywhere near as much as the majors do.

    Lol the only slam Fed won since AO 2010? Rafa was clearly injured unless you think he took 7 months off because he couldn't get over the loss to Rosol.

    I left out Wimbledon because Rafa didn't make the final, whereas he made the 2010 USO final, the 2010 WIM final, the 2011 WIM final, the 2011 USO final and the 2012 AO final. His argument was when Fed was making finals, Rafa wasn't up to it, so I just merely pointed out that when Rafa was making HC and grass finals, Fed wasn't up to it either.
     
  13. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall


    Lolololololololololol. Yes it was clear rafa was injured 2 weeks after he lost when his camp said so. And what does it matter rafa is always injured anyway, roflmao.

    Meanwhile fed beat murraay and djoker to win wimby, the same djoker that destroyed rafa in the 2011 wimby final, lol
     
  14. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,259
    Yes and No.

    Yes, Federer played some GS finals against first time GS finalists (Baghdatis, Gonzalez, Djokovic, Murray, Soderling) whereas Nadal has had to beat Federer himself many times in GS finals.....who cares?

    One player can only beat the field that exists in his time, and it is not clear at all that one set of players were "better" than other set of players (that may have peaked in earlier years) it will always be opinable that kind of things.

    That is why it doesn't make any sense to try to compare numbers from different eras.

    Even talking about Roddick-Hewitt-old Agassi versus Murray-Nadal-Djokovic is not clear at all, because old (and clearly worse) Federer has defeated Murray and Djokovic many times, even in GS finals. Peak Federer could have won against Murray and Djokovic as easily and often as he did against Roddick and Hewitt and Old-Agassi. Nobody knows.

    It is problematic to compare these kind of things even when only 5 years apart. Imagine trying to compare numbers or fields from different eras or decades. It is impossible.

    Federer won 11 GS in four years ( 2004-2007 ) and that's it. I don't care if many people think it was only possible because of luck of weak competition.

    I don't even care what player is "the best" of this era (for me is Federer, but this kind of things are totally subjective because of many factors that vary constantly).

    What I like is to watch great tennis players and matches, and all this "X player is better than Y player because such and such and mostly because he is my God" stinks, seriously, a totally teenage-girl kind of thing dreaming about his rock-super-star-hero.

    Sadly, this is exactly what we have here in the forums, such many many childlish people devoting their life to the "my hero is more handsome that yours, and taller too" sad thing.
     
  15. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,779
    Nadal is more handsome than Federer, if not taller
     
  16. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,634
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    The comparisons of Roger's and Rafa's age is not an exact one. Roger won a slam at age 22. He was ready to win a slam only by then. Rafa got one at age 18. Guys like Sampras and Roger weren't slam ready at such young age. Roger got a slam in 2003 and he won all slams except RG the very next year.

    Rafa got slam in 2005 and he had to wait 3 years to get a Wimbledon, four years to get an AO and 5 years to get US Open. Its silly to say that he can win RG, be at number two ranking and is unable to make finals on hard courts and finally say that Roger and Rafa won hard court slams at same age, and say that Rafa was learning on hard courts how to play. If you are playing that game, I can say that Rafa started winning slams once Roger was out of prime and old. The truth is Rafa was getting beaten by guys.

    Lastly if you are playing the age card, Rafa at age 26 has played two AO finals, won one. He played two US and won one. Now what about Roger? 4 US Opens and 3 Australian Opens.
     
  17. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,757
    The field must have been too strong for them. It could be the indication of a strong era, as much as the opposite.

    Exactly. Federer got to 11 GS in four years, it has taken Nadal eight so far to do the same.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  18. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,757
    Federer dominates three GS, Nadal one.
     
  19. Crisstti

    Crisstti Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,269
    Location:
    Chile
    No, it doesn't mean that. Not that there's an exact definition.

    He would have at least 4 of each major, and it would be because of a lack of competition.

    Yeah, yeah, Roddick, Safin... Haas and Davydenko (!) make for a stronger filed.

    Sure.

    Rafa's resume in no way falls shorter of a claim.

    Uhm, every hater on this forum?.
     
  20. Crisstti

    Crisstti Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,269
    Location:
    Chile
    But you cannot take it away. His clay record is part of his overall record and that overall record is goatworthy.

    Nadal is not at all a reverse Sampras. Sampras was not a top player on clay. He never even made a RG final. You can't say that about Nadal on any slam.

    It's not the same to make this little game of "take away X surface" with Rafa or Fed, because Rafa's record on clay is better than Fed's on hard court or on grass.

    And Rafa's probably better on grass (and maybe on hc) than Fed is on clay.

    I'll give Pete that :)
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  21. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,634
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Pete wasn't as lucky as Rafa was. The courts were all sowed down in 200s and Rafa managed to win US Open and Wimbledon. If ATP did the reverse by speeding up RG, may be he would have won that also!

    Surely, there is a huge difference between Rafa and Pete. If you are not able to see that, it's because you are just a blind worshipper.
     
  22. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,757
    No, and I do think you know that.

    Takes one to know one I guess.
     
  23. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,979
    Stop using that word, it is stupid. Every time a person does not have glowing and raving reviews for everything Nadal says and does you label him or her a hater. It is an overused and misused word. Also, by your own definition you are a hater, a Federer hater, so don't be a hypocrite.
     
  24. Polvorin

    Polvorin Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    817
    Fed was never lucky enough to play him at the USOpen for one thing, since he wasn't ever good enough to make the final. And he did push Rafa to 5 at both the AO and Wimbledon...so..?
     
  25. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    It is goatworthy...for clay. but overall? No.

    His records and achievments show he is the clay goat and a great enough player to win a few slams on other surfaces.

    How in the world is a guy who was barely world number one for 2 years( not consecutive) in GOAT discussion?

    How is a guy who spent 4 years as world number 2 behind fed GOATworthy?

    How is a guy who has never defended a non clay title, not won a world tour final GOATworthy?

    And for the last time, NOBODY is saying discount the clay.

    What is being said is WITHOUT clay, Nadal who already isnt in the GOAT discussion, would not even be remotely considered based on his off clay resume alone. How you are not understanding this is beyond me.

    Meanwhile with Fed take away grass: 5 consecutive USO, 4 AO, 6 WTF, record weeks number 1, record consecutive weeks number( I still give him these because at his peak the gap between 1 and 2 was ridiculous) at least 5 titles at 5 different tournaments, 5 FO finals and 1 FO win. 10 slams, with rafa being only one better.

    the only way rafa's resume stacks up to roger's is if you eliminated HC and assume clay tournaments are the same or increased and also add more grass.


    And finally, Did I not say that Rafa and Pete's careers are similar in that they dominated one surface except for the fact that Rafa was better than Pete on his off surfaces(eg grass and HC) than pete was on his(clay)?????

    Pete used his grass and HC dominance to retain number 1 ranking since he did nothing on clay every year

    Rafa cleans up on clay and was able to finally overtake Fed in the rankings as he started win HC slams and win wimbledon

    See how they are similar now????????

    If Pete is not GOATworthy because he has no career slam and barely any clay resume, then Rafa is same because his off clay resume (i.e. no world tour finals, barely any non clay masters ) not to mention his lack of YE#1s, consecutive weeks number 1 etc etc.

    How many non clay masters does Rafa have? 5,6? How many finals apprearances consecutive or not in grass/hc slams?? And even taking Fed out of the equation for the most part his HC record would still be the same minus winning Miami and 1 possibly 2 WTF.

    Take Rafa out of the equation and Fed probably has a couple of Grand Slam years.

    Fed was stopped on clay by the clayGOAT, rafa was stopped on HC for the most part by the field. How is he GOATworthy again??

    Put it like this: Djoker has 6 slams,, 2 more than Rafa's non clay slams. That is still 1 less than the number of slams fed has won at ONE slam.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2013
  26. Crisstti

    Crisstti Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,269
    Location:
    Chile
    Yes overall, because clay is part of it all. And like I said, it's not the same to take out clay for Rafa than to take out grass or hc for Fed.

    He has been number one the same amount of time than Borg was.

    Not defending a title is irrelevant. And the WTF is a hole on his resume like there are on many other goatworthy players. Fed himself only won RG because rafa was injured, while Rafa has beat the best in all the slams, but let's just ignore that, right?.

    Rafa being MUCH better on hc and grass than Sampras on clay makes all the difference.

    And Rafa has beaten the best on hc, while Fed hasn't on clay. And I hate to quote a poster who may be one of NSK versions, but he began winning on hc at a similar age than Fed, and his main problem since have been injuries, more than the field (other than Djokovic).

    I'm not saying Fed doesn't have some things on his favour here, he obviously does, but so does Rafa and several other players.
     
  27. Povl Carstensen

    Povl Carstensen Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    5,757
    Understatement of the day.
     
  28. SLD76

    SLD76 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    9,795
    Location:
    Minneapolis, North of the Wall
    Fed won the FO cuz rafa got beat before the final and Fed didnt. Ummmm arent you a *******? Didnt he even admit in his book the Wimbledon withdrawal was due more to off the court stuff than actual injury?


    Fed has beaten Rafa on clay, just not at the FO. Rafa is a the 4th best hardcort player of his era ( Fed, djoker, Murray, Nadal)

    Who gives a damn when he began winning what, the point is, you either win or you dont.
    Rafa has an matchup advantage with Fed, but Fed has been demonstrably better
    against the whole field, as evidenced by his multiple slams at 3 different slams and record weeks
    at number 1. 17 slams at various venues imply field domination does it not? not to mention consecutive finals
    appearances on his worst surface. Wouldnt you expect a GOAT player to dominate the field?
    Yes, no? I'll gladly take a bad matchup against one player in exchange for dominance against 99.99% of the field.


    Rafa has elements in his favor yes.

    they are just inferior to fed's is all.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2013
  29. akind

    akind Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    255
    Location:
    Here

Share This Page