Would Nadal be GCCOAT if...

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Safinator_1, Apr 13, 2009.

  1. Safinator_1

    Safinator_1 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Hey guys just wondering if Nadal were to win his 5th consecutive FO this year which i think he has a good chance to. Would he be considered the GCCOAT ahead of Borg. (BTW those who are confused GCCOAT = Greatest Clay Courter Of All Time)

    I know that Borg has 6 FO titles but he only achieved 4 consecutive FO titles. Nadal currently has that same achievment in consecutive FO now but if he were to win it this year he would have 5. Nadal also holds the record for most Clay Court wins in the entire era and most dominant Clay record in his generation 100 something to 2.

    Nadal also holds 4 consecutive AMS montecarlos, 4 consecutive Barcelonas, 3 Consecutive AMS Rome and AMS hamburg before its downgraded.

    Would this FO put Nadal ahead of Borg or would he have to win FO next year which shouldn't be a problem considering he maintains his form
     
    #1
  2. Josherer

    Josherer Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,337
    Location:
    Australia
    Wait till career's over.

    He could win the next 2 french's and then for the rest of his carrer loose in the 1st round of every french for all we know.

    It's too early to judge wether or not a player is GOAT before career has ended.
     
    #2
  3. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,543
    Location:
    Back from prison
    To be the undisputed GCCOAT Nadal needs to win either 6 consecutive or 7 total RG titles.
     
    #3
  4. clayman2000

    clayman2000 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    2,849
    Once again people confuse greatness with stats.
    Its not about how much you do, but rather how good are you

    Its more of a in their prime, who would win Nadal or Borg.
     
    #4
  5. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    He needs to win at least 7 to be considered the greatest clay courter of all tiime.
     
    #5
  6. gj011

    gj011 Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,543
    Location:
    Back from prison
    You can't compare players from different eras that way. Also since time traveling machine is not invented yet they could never play each other in their prime.

    That is way their career achievements is the only valid and objective way to compare them.
     
    #6
  7. Turning Pro

    Turning Pro Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,430
    Wrong 6 consecutive would make it pretty much undisputed. 5 consecutive is a wash.
     
    #7
  8. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    Do you know what undisputed means? If he wins 6, people who prefer Borg are not going to say that Nadal is above Borg. He would be at most the equivalent of Borg in their perspective. Undisputed is a situation where EVERYBODY agrees on something. If Nadal wins 6, it won't be undisputed. Many will claim him the greatest, but definitely not all.
     
    #8
  9. tournaking

    tournaking Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    126
    Shouldn't the stength of the other players of each era be factored into the equation?
     
    #9
  10. JediMindTrick

    JediMindTrick Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,537
    This is a rethoric question, no?
     
    #10
  11. 380pistol

    380pistol Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,903

    That's one way, but not the only valid way. Too many variables get overlooked if that's the only measuring stick. Certain things like the level of players around, climate of the game are also heavy factors, as well as some others I may be omitting.
     
    #11
  12. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    I'm already putting Nadal ahead of Borg on clay. Here is why:
    at Nadal's age, Borg had won 18 tournaments on clay (2 of which called "pepsi grand slam" had only 2 rounds with only 4 players participating, a format that doesn't exist anymore and cannot be compared to any current event on clay). Nadal has won 22 tournaments on clay.
    Borg had won 3 RG (1974, 1975 and 1978) and had also lost 3 (1973, 1976 and 1977). Nadal has won 4 consecutive RG (2005, 2006, 2007, 2008) and has never lost any.
    Outside of RG the clay events Borg had won several times were:
    - Boston: 3 times
    -Bastad: 2 times
    - Rome: 2 times
    - Barcelona: 2 times
    Nadal:
    - Monte-Carlo: 4 times
    - Barcelona: 4 times
    - Rome: 3 times
    - Stuttgart: 2 times
    Borg had lost on clay 28 times to 17 different players. Nadal has only lost 14 times (exactly half!) to 12 different players.
    Players to whom Borg had lost several times on clay:
    - Adriano Panatta: 5 times
    - Jimmy Connors: 3 times
    - Raul Ramirez: 3 times
    - Manuel Orantes: 2 times
    - Corrado Barazzutti: 2 times
    - Ilie Nastase: 2 times.
    The ONLY player Nadal has lost to several times on clay is Gaston Gaudio (3 times). And of course Nadal also holds the record for longest streak on clay (or on any surface for that matter): 81 matches won in a row.
    For all those reasons, I consider Nadal a better clay court player than Borg at this point in time.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2009
    #12
  13. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    So basically you're comparing Borg's losses to Jimmy Connors to Nadal's losses to Gaudio? :confused: Let's be real here. Those stats are hardly an indication of GOATness.
     
    #13
  14. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    If Nadal won 6 consecutive RG, it would be totally undisputed as Borg did NOT win his 6 titles consecutively (6 consecutive is a better record than 6 non consecutive). There are other reasons why Nadal's dominance would be undisputed: Nadal holding records that Borg doesn't have such as (and those are just examples): most # of tournaments won on clay overall, most wins at specific tournaments, fewest losses and to fewest opponents, longest streak on clay, etc, etc
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2009
    #14
  15. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    he would need to have more FO wins than Borg, and also beat Borg in one of those finals to be considered GCCOAT.
     
    #15
  16. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    I am not comparing Connors to Gaudio at all (I believe Gaudio is a better clay courter than Connors but that's totally off topic). I'm showing you that at 22, Borg had lost to 6 different players several times and to 1 of those players (Panatta) 5 times (including at RG). I'm comparing that to Nadal who only lost several times to 1 player, never more than 3 times and never at RG and yes I'm claiming that so far Nadal has outclassed Borg on clay in every department.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2009
    #16
  17. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    That's what you have in mind, but it doesn't neccessasy means that everyone will agree with you. I for one don't think that Nadal will be undisputed if he wins the French Open only 6 times. That would put him at the level of Borg, but not above Borg.
     
    #17
  18. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    That's just laughable. Connors is a great clay court player. He is one of the few players who won his grand slams on three different surfaces. His 1976 US Open victory was against Borg on clay. Gaudio is basically a lottery grand slam winner against a crippled Coria. Connors has won far more clay titles than Gaudio can ever dream of. There is no comparison whatsoever between these two. I understand that you are being bias toward Nadal, but those comparisons are just not a valid point to claim Nadal as the greatest clay courter of all time. He needs to win at least 7 French Open to be considered the undisputed greatest clay courter of all time.
     
    #18
  19. JoshDragon

    JoshDragon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,235
    Not if he wins them consecutively. Borg never won 6 straight.
     
    #19
  20. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    Didn't you just read what I said? You can back up your thought with whatever you want, but in the end not everyone will agree with you if Nadal only wins 6 French Open. Get it, mr. Goku? BTW, Dragon Ball movie sucks.
     
    #20
  21. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    If Nadal_Freak and Veroniquem make enough excuses>>> Nadal will definitely be the GCCOAT.

    BTW, Gaudio?Connors?? Goes to show how limited your thought process is.
     
    #21
  22. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,614
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    If Nadal wins 6 FO and one happens to be one the fist day of moonssoons in India and in Burkina faso is Full Moon, then Nadal would be GCCWIMAIAFMABSOAT...
     
    #22
  23. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    And you have 0 arguments to back up that claim (other than personal preference), meaning that claim would be whimsical and unsubstantiated. For all (other) rational people 6 consecutive rank higher than 6 non consecutive and longest streak on one surface ranks higher than... no streak at all.
     
    #23
  24. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    Wow, that sounds harder than winning 7 FO. I guess he can also be GCCOAT if he can accomplish that one. :lol:
     
    #24
  25. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    That is ridiculous. I already said that the comparison between Connors and Gaudio was completely off topic. It is not the reason why Nadal is the best at this point. Since you choose to totally ignore the reasons, I will summarize them 1 last time. At same age, Borg had:
    - fewer titles on clay than Nadal
    - fewer RG than Nadal
    - had never won any clay title more than 3 times
    - had lost to more opponents more times and to the same opponents more times than Nadal
    - Nadal has the record for longest streak on clay (or on a single surface)
    About the comparison (off topic) of Connors to Gaudio, the most prestigious title on clay is RG ( was USO even on red clay?) and Connors has never won RG, that's why I rank Gaudio higher on that surface but that's irrelevant to this thread and can be discussed elsewhere if you wish to.
    PS: the major difference in head to heads between Borg and Nadal has nothing to do with Gaudio. It has everything to do with Panatta to whom Borg lost 5 times on clay including at RG.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2009
    #25
  26. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    Varoniquem, read the above post. Learn something yet?? Your posts are nothing but excuses to make Nadal the greatest. BTW, did you just skip school today? Bad boy. :mad:
     
    #26
  27. anointedone

    anointedone Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,653
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    While I am a big Nadal, Borg faced a much tougher clay court field than Nadal has. So Nadal IMHO would need to win either 7 consecutive French Opens or 8 combined (if not consecutive) French Opens to be the GCCOAT. I personally believe he will do that though, or more.
     
    #27
  28. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    They're not called excuses, they're called arguments, of which you have none. And FYI I'm not a boy ;-)
     
    #28
  29. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida

    Hmm, so now we are bringing *age* into the discussion. In that case, Borg won 2 French Opens by the time he was 19 years old, vs Nadal's one. Guess that makes him greater.

    Thanks, :roll:
     
    #29
  30. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    WOW, this guy has some serious logic for a dedicated Nadal fan. You should go to law school!
     
    #30
  31. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    Does that mean you would not consider any record outside of RG? (like most tournaments overall, most matches won, most success at same tournament or best head to heads overall). In that case it would be best RG player rather than best clay player overall.
     
    #31
  32. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    Basically, Federer would be a nobody according to his logic. :???:
     
    #32
  33. tahiti

    tahiti Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    840
    The fact that Rafa holds the longest winning streak on clay makes him already the goat on clay in my opinion. Add onto that all the titles so far and yet to come....it will only get better. He'd also have to equal Borg's record of FOs and maybe one more, but Borg never had such an unbelievable streak on clay, even with the titles he got. So Rafa is clearly the record holder on clay to date.
     
    #33
  34. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    ^^Problem is, veroniquem and nadal_freak (the two biggest Nadal haters on the board), have no logic.
     
    #34
  35. tahiti

    tahiti Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    840
    And your job on the board is to......?
    Critisize everybody.
     
    #35
  36. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    teenage years is a bit too young to make comparisons. Borg won most of his titles between the age of 18 and 23, so the comparison to current Nadal (= by the age of 23) is quite relevant. Anyway that's why I added "to this point" or "so far" if only you could read. I have no way to predict what Nadal is gonna do in the next 3 years.
     
    #36
  37. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Too many mistakes.

    A pretty shoddy way to look at things. Borg won fewer clay court events, but he also played fewer clay court events. The other thing to mention is that the atp doesn't count a great number of events, so Borg most likely won an equal or bigger amount of titles on clay (does it matter?).

    1) Borg didn't lose in 1977. He didn't play due to the WTT dispute. His loss in 1973 was when he was 16.

    2) Nadal, to the best of my knowledge, missed the 2003/2004 RGs due to injuries. Had he not done that he would have had two RG losses to his record.

    The tour wasn't organized like it is today. Boston was a masters-quality event, if you will. Borg won there for three years in a row, but soon after, most likely due to the move of the US Open to Flushing, the event lost much of its lustre. Borg didn't play there again.

    Borg played in Rome exactly three times. 1974, 1975 and 1978. That's it. He also skipped Monte Carlo in 1976 and 1978.

    I won't bother with Bastad and Stuttgart.

    The problem with your analysis is that it is much too quantitative, when you should be looking at percentages. In terms of quantity, Nadal will always come out on top, because the schedule never changes from year to year.

    Another example of one-sided quantitative outlook on the players, ignoring the fact that most of Borg's losses came early in his career, while Nadal missed a lot of big events at that same age.

    Try again. This is bad.
     
    #37
  38. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,667
    ROFL!!! You just love making senseless excuses, aren't ya? :)
     
    #38
  39. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Let's forget the RG titles for a second and focus on Borg as the best player on red clay.

    If we look at RG titles only then we ignore 1977 completely and this is the year when Borg had a record of 22-0 on the surface, but missed RG due to WTT. He was 2-0 against that year's RG champ Vilas on clay.

    Borg was clearly the best clay courter for five years in a row (1977-1981).

    If Nadal dominates again this year he will equal that feat - however Borg also put together solid results on clay from 1974 to 1976, although not peak-dominant.
     
    #39
  40. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    And the age you use is a bit too old. LMAO!!
     
    #40
  41. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    You have very good points here, especially the fact that Borg didn't play RG in 1977. Still, no matter how you look at it, the results are there:
    3 RG for Borg, 4 for Nadal
    5 losses to Panatta for Borg, not more than 3 to 1 player for Nadal
    Longest streak on clay for Nadal
    I do not believe that Borg played fewer clay tournaments a year than Nadal but if he did, as you claim, that would make it even worse since it would mean that Borg lost twice as much as Nadal and to many more players than Nadal OVER THE COURSE OF FEWER TOURNAMENTS, THUS FEWER MATCHES. Such a fact could NOT make his resume look better no matter what.
     
    #41
  42. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    wrong, 2 RG for Borg, 1 for Nadal.
     
    #42
  43. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    I'm not talking at 19. We all know Borg was the most precocious player ever which is precisely why Nadal is unlikely to have a shorter career than him and is very likely to increase the advantage he already has over Borg in the future. For instance, if Nadal wins RG this year, he will have 5 consecutive RG titles at 23, something which Borg never achieved in the course of his career.
     
    #43
  44. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,482
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    I am, and I will remind you, **YOU** are the one that keeps bringing age into the discussion.
     
    #44
  45. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I fail to see the validity here. Borg is worse than Nadal because he played World Team Tennis in 1977?

    Eh? Wha? Huh?

    Three of those were when Borg was 16. You're a better poster than this. You can think critically. I know you can.

    It's like they sucked out your brain and replaced it with Josh's. This makes zero sense.
     
    #45
  46. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Heh. We can pick an arbitrary age and base our arguments on it. That's how it works.

    Of course if Nadal keeps up dominating like this until he's 28 then I guess he'll have 10 French Opens and will be the clay king for all times.

    But some posters are a bit too eager to count the unhatched chickens.
     
    #46
  47. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    No, because at the age of 20 (1976) Borg lost in the quarter final to Panatta at RG while Nadal won RG from 19 to 22 years old without losing there to anybody, which is why Nadal has the streak of 4 in a row at age 22, because Nadal never lost 5 times to another player on clay be it at 16, 15 or any age at all, because Nadal has only lost 14 times on clay in all (and that includes all the matches he played at 16 years old as well) vs 28 times for Borg (at same age as Nadal) even though (according to you) Nadal played even more matches on clay than Borg.
     
    #47
  48. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    1) Nadal wasn't averaging as many matches on clay at the ages 15-17 as Borg did; Borg's losses came because he was playing more in those years, losing to older guys like Panatta.

    2) If you want to make the argument that Nadal is a more accomplished player at the age of 22 (almost 23) than Borg than go ahead, but he doesn't have as good a career on the surface quite yet.

    Now, I bet if Borgforever were here he'd tell you that Nadal never faced anyone like Panatta and that in general today's competition on the surface is a joke. But even ignoring all of that, your arguments still don't add up.
     
    #48
  49. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    34,809
    Location:
    New York
    I agree that this is a temporary assessment. I have never said otherwise and it will have to be reevaluated by the time Nadal ends his career.
    However, given how short Borg's career was I do not expect time to play in favor of Borg in that matter but who knows? We'll see.
     
    #49
  50. CyBorg

    CyBorg Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,551
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Rewind to 1981 and everyone's talking about how Borg will win 10 French Opens. Same old song.
     
    #50

Share This Page