Nadal: 2 things are quite clear

[Amelie Mauresmo]

Originally Posted by monfed

Yes it is. Ralph has basically 6 real RGs, and even if you consider his 7 RGs, some people consider Borg as the better clay courter,if not its a tie. Borg didn't have the luxury to moonball weak 1HBH like Ralph so he had it much much harder to dominate at RG.

Ralph's 2011 RG has a big star on it,a widely acknowledged fact. Look as much as I like Ralph I can't quite crown him the clay GOAT cause that would be injustice to Borg,sorry.

Even Borg said Nadal is a better clay court player than he is. Nadal only lost ONCE at the French Open the guy is invincible on clay. Look how many times Nadal has destroyed Federer in the French Open final. Nadal also has more French Open titles than Borg. Come on, face the facts Nadal is superior to Borg on clay.

[Mike Sams]

Originally Posted by Amelie Mauresmo

Even Borg said Nadal is a better clay court player than he is. Nadal only lost ONCE at the French Open the guy is invincible on clay. Look how many times Nadal has destroyed Federer in the French Open final. Nadal also has more French Open titles than Borg. Come on, face the facts Nadal is superior to Borg on clay.

Let's see Nadal play with Borg's wooden racquet.

[gsharma]

Originally Posted by Mike Sams

Let's see Nadal play with Borg's wooden racquet.

Do you get reruns of Nightrider in India?

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by smoledman

Wow, so the overall GOAT debate is down to Laver or Federer. What more does Fed have to do? Win 20 slams?

Laver and Federer aren't the only GOAT contenders if you study tennis history properly.

[veroniquem]

Originally Posted by monfed

Yes it is. Ralph has basically 6 real RGs, and even if you consider his 7 RGs, some people consider Borg as the better clay courter,if not its a tie. Borg didn't have the luxury to moonball weak 1HBH like Ralph so he had it much much harder to dominate at RG.

Ralph's 2011 RG has a big star on it,a widely acknowledged fact. Look as much as I like Ralph I can't quite crown him the clay GOAT cause that would be injustice to Borg,sorry.

What do you mean 6 "real" RG? You lost me there. Rafa has more RG than Borg, Borg only got 8 masters on clay vs 16 for Nadal. His winning % is way higher than Borg's (93 vs 86) and he has more overall clay titles than Borg. What else do you need? Sorry but you just don't have a case here.

[TennisD]

Originally Posted by Shangri La

Nadal is a lot weaker, mentally and physically, than most people have given him credit for.

This has to be a joke, right? You can call Rafael Nadal a lot of things, but suggesting that he's not one of the strongest players of the last 20 years, both physically and mentally, is absurd.

[dafinch]

Originally Posted by Rjtennis

A silent ban is complete nonsense. If he was caught using banned chemicals he would have an outright ban. I agree that with his injuries and the elevated play at the top of the game I'm sure he has lost a lot of confidence.

What is your explanation for Agassi's drug use being covered up? And he was as prominent then as Nadal is now, not to mention, covering up a drug which clearly doesn't help one's tennis would seem to be less necessary than one that does-but they covered it up anyway.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by TennisD

This has to be a joke, right? You can call Rafael Nadal a lot of things, but suggesting that he's not one of the strongest players of the last 20 years, both physically and mentally, is absurd.

I agree with you. That is why when people say Nadal has not shown up for six months because he is afraid to play Rosol or Djokovic, I just laugh. That ain't it!

[Feather]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Laver and Federer aren't the only GOAT contenders if you study tennis history properly.

Mustard, he is NOT a Federer fan. NOT even remotely close. He is just unnessarily bring the GOAT point into a discussion about Nadal just to make Nadal fans to quote the H2H with Federer. Unfortunately for him, Veroniquem didn't get the drift

[Feather]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

What do you mean 6 "real" RG? You lost me there. Rafa has more RG than Borg, Borg only got 8 masters on clay vs 16 for Nadal. His winning % is way higher than Borg's (93 vs 86) and he has more overall clay titles than Borg. What else do you need? Sorry but you just don't have a case here.

It's just cr*p what else?

Rafa is the best in RG, there is no counter argument there. Rafa has lost ONLY one match in RG and anyone should be plain stupid to ignore such an obvious point. That's incredible and I think success like that is very rare in Sports let alone Tennis

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

What do you mean 6 "real" RG? You lost me there. Rafa has more RG than Borg, Borg only got 8 masters on clay vs 16 for Nadal. His winning % is way higher than Borg's (93 vs 86) and he has more overall clay titles than Borg. What else do you need? Sorry but you just don't have a case here.

What Montroll is trying to say is that he thinks Nadal's RG title last year doesn't count because he did not play Eeyore in the final.

[Feather]

Originally Posted by monfed

Yes it is. Ralph has basically 6 real RGs, and even if you consider his 7 RGs, some people consider Borg as the better clay courter,if not its a tie. Borg didn't have the luxury to moonball weak 1HBH like Ralph so he had it much much harder to dominate at RG.

Ralph's 2011 RG has a big star on it,a widely acknowledged fact. Look as much as I like Ralph I can't quite crown him the clay GOAT cause that would be injustice to Borg,sorry.

NO, there is no star attached to it. Rafa is the defending RG champion in 2011. So the onus is on Djokovic to prove that he is better than Nadal at RG by beating Nadal. He failed at his first test, against Federer. There is no point in speculating what would have happened if Djokovic entered final. It's NOT Rafa's fault that Djokovic didn't reach final

[Feather]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

What Montroll is trying to say is that he thinks Nadal's RG title last year doesn't count because he did not play Eeyore in the final.

lolz @ the names

[bullfan]

Originally Posted by smoledman

Congrats Nadal is the clay GOAT replacing the previous clay GOAT(Borg, Vilas, whoever). Nobody really cares about surface GOAT, but Overall GOAT = Federer.

Laver is GOAT.....

[Agassifan]

No question that Rafa is the clay GOAT... just like Fed is the GOAT.

[qindarka]

Originally Posted by Agassifan

No question that Rafa is the clay GOAT... just like Fed is the GOAT.

There is still significant question on the latter.

[Rocky89]

Originally Posted by dafinch

What is your explanation for Agassi's drug use being covered up? And he was as prominent then as Nadal is now, not to mention, covering up a drug which clearly doesn't help one's tennis would seem to be less necessary than one that does-but they covered it up anyway.

They covered up for Agassi, but they let him continue to play. If Nadal were to be caught doping, then they would cover up for him too and let him continue to play, just like Agassi. That is why the silent ban theory is total bs.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by bullfan

Laver is GOAT.....

That is OK.

He played tennis in different conditions, with different equipment and different requirements towards the players.

[Hood_Man]

Originally Posted by Amelie Mauresmo

I definitely think the Wimbledon loss to Rosol destroyed Nadal's confidence and he doesn't seem to have much desire for the game anymore. The guy's young only 26, very wealthy he doesn't need to play tennis anymore he's won a ton of slams. I wonder if Nadal is going to end up like Borg and retire at a young age?

This has been my theory for a while. I started thinking this in 2009 when he lost early in Paris. Sure he would have been devastated, & he came back and dominated those 6 months or so again in 2010, but since becoming THE Nadal in 2005, 2009 was the only year he was able to celebrate his birthday properly. That's a real sacrifice for a young man to make.

Amongst other things of course.

Originally Posted by smoledman

Wow, so the overall GOAT debate is down to Laver or Federer. What more does Fed have to do? Win 20 slams?

He must beat Laver in Mortal Kombat. Finish HIM!



Or Mario Kart.

[Steve0904]

Originally Posted by TennisD

This has to be a joke, right? You can call Rafael Nadal a lot of things, but suggesting that he's not one of the strongest players of the last 20 years, both physically and mentally, is absurd.

The other poster didn't say he wasn't mentally or physically strong. He/she simply said he's overrated in that department, and that is very debatable. For the record, I think he's one of the strongest players on both accounts that tennis has ever seen never mind the last 20 years.

But for example, a lot of people look at Nadal's 5 set record and his wins over Federer, and say he's mentally tough. This is true obviously, however they fail to mention his really bad losses to Gonzalez, Delpo, Tsonga, and Federer (at WTF 2007 and 2011). Contrast this with say Federer and off the top of my head I can only recall 2 matches in a longer career where he's been absolutely blown off the court. Those being RG 2008 and Olympics 2012. The general consensus is that if Nadal can get it to 5 (or 3) sets he will win, but he's been "destroyed" a fair bit in his career for someone of his standard. The thing about this logic is that no one actually questions Nadal's mental toughness. Everybody just says "Well that guy was way too good today" and everybody moves on. He's also had many injuries and MTO's, but he's known for fitness and stamina. People will say if he wins he was healthy or he was injured but he fought through it, but when he loses "He was injured!" is a favourite line. Again, I still believe he is one of the strongest on both accounts in all time, but this is some food for thought.

Contrast this again with Federer, and you have almost total opposites. Federer has an average 5 set record for someone of his standard, but he rarely gets blown off the court. Therefore Federer often loses very close matches, mostly to rival players because lesser players can't take him to 5 sets and are often beaten very easily. Then it is more prudent to question mental toughness because he lost a 5 set match where he often had a thousand chances to break and never took advantage of them. It's a study in how you want to lose matches with both these guys. Also physically, he has only 2 walkovers in over 1000 matches (a significant amount more than Nadal obviously as he's older by 5 years), and has never retired in his career. In fact, aside from Wimbledon 2012 I can't remember the last time he called a trainer on the court.

Just some food for thought.