Proof Nadal is better than his rivals

[pvaudio]

Originally Posted by Nadalgaenger

Has a winning record against Federer (11-9) and a crap record against Nadal (5-11)

Djokovic also is pretty even with Federer (13-15) but even despite the infamous 7-match win streak trails Rafa 14-19 in the H2H.

Basically Rafa will retire with all of his chief rivals having losing records against him.

Fed, by contrast, will retire with losing records to Nadal, Murray, and likely to Djokovic. And yet Fed is the GOAT???

Are tennis courts named after players because they had great H2H against players, or because they were more successful than their peers? I don't think it's called the BJK tennis center because she took Goolagong and Wade to task in the semis but never won anything.

[Sentinel]

Originally Posted by Nadalgaenger

The most convincing evidence of Nadal's greatness relative to rivals like Fed, Djoker, and others is the high esteem in which other top players hold him.

Murray, Ferrer, Berdych, Tipsarevic--all consider Nadal the toughest player to beat.

And Djokovic has been quoted as saying that Nadal is the greatest player of all time.

Nadal will not pass Federer but he will come close. And if he ends up with 15 majors or more, he will be GOAT because of the H2H and Fed's WEAK ERA.

But how can Rafa be the GOAT due to H2H if he has a poor H2H with Nole ? He could not beat a prime Nole in 2011 (whereas Fed could !!).

If Fed benefitted from a weak era, then so did Rafa, winning his slams before Joker peaked. (Now Nole has a weak era since Fed and Rafa are finished). Soon the weak era of Murray's domination will commence *rolls eyes*

[mariecon]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

But how can Rafa be the GOAT due to H2H if he has a poor H2H with Nole ? He could not beat a prime Nole in 2011 (whereas Fed could !!).

If Fed benefitted from a weak era, then so did Rafa, winning his slams before Joker peaked. (Now Nole has a weak era since Fed and Rafa are finished). Soon the weak era of Murray's domination will commence *rolls eyes*

He has a losing H2H with Rosol. How can he be the GOAT when he has a losing H2H with a guy ranked outside the top 50?

Let's see what Ralph's H2H is with Nole when he retires. My guess is he will be on the losing end.

Because it's not really fair to compare eras or generations, the best way to find the GOAT is to look at GS glory. 17>11>6. Once these three retire we'll know who was the best by their GS count.

[Nadalgaenger]

There is so much Nadal hate on here it isn't funny.

Why is it so hard for people to recognize him as an all-time great. He currently cannot be called GOAT, but if he can come back and win another 4 or so majors then the conversation has to be started again.

[Nadalgaenger]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

But how can Rafa be the GOAT due to H2H if he has a poor H2H with Nole ? He could not beat a prime Nole in 2011 (whereas Fed could !!).

If Fed benefitted from a weak era, then so did Rafa, winning his slams before Joker peaked. (Now Nole has a weak era since Fed and Rafa are finished). Soon the weak era of Murray's domination will commence *rolls eyes*

Dude: Nadal has a WINNING record against Nole too (and that despite Lance's domination of him in 2011)!!!

Check the stats next time!

[Nadalgaenger]

Originally Posted by Goosehead

Proof OP is better at being destroyed in his own thread than other poasters

What is a "poaster"?

[Nadalgaenger]

Originally Posted by Sentinel

But how can Rafa be the GOAT due to H2H if he has a poor H2H with Nole ? He could not beat a prime Nole in 2011 (whereas Fed could !!).

If Fed benefitted from a weak era, then so did Rafa, winning his slams before Joker peaked. (Now Nole has a weak era since Fed and Rafa are finished). Soon the weak era of Murray's domination will commence *rolls eyes*

Rafa won most of his slams against the GOAT!! He beat the GOAT on his favorite surface! In 2008, Fed was supremely dominant at Wimby until the Nadal match--he hadn't dropped a set going into that showdown!

Nadal did to the GOAT what the GOAT could never do to him--knock him off on his favorite surface. Sorry, but Fed's FO title was a bit of a joke--he didn't beat a single top player on clay and almost lost to Haas and Del Potro along the way.

[sbengte]

Originally Posted by Nadalgaenger

What is a "poaster"?

I hoap you will understand some day as you read moar poasts here.

[Flash O'Groove]

Originally Posted by Nadalgaenger

There is so much Nadal hate on here it isn't funny.

Why is it so hard for people to recognize him as an all-time great. He currently cannot be called GOAT, but if he can come back and win another 4 or so majors then the conversation has to be started again.

A lot of people recognize him as an all time great, some as THE clay all-time great (the other think he might be tied with Borg). He is without a doubt in the top 10 of all time. But your thread is not about him being a great player, it is about him being better than is rival because he has a winning H2H against, AND was clever enough to lose against more different players than them. You can't really hope an interesting discussion with these kind of premise. Just like the other thread with Fed being fun while Nole is boring has few chance that Nole's fan will acknowledge that Fed's game is beautiful.

[zam88]

If federer could have only:

known he could not beat rafa on clay and thus tanked almost all clay semis except for the 09 RG when Rafa was knocked out, and then quit overall after 2010 AO he could have had +H2H against Djoker and Murray (and a near even record against rafa) and 16 majors.

and somehow i think that would've been better to a lot of the people here on TT than him staying around, making more clay finals (that he lost to the clay freaking GOAT!... do you realize if Nadal were just a great clay player and not the Cgoat that federer would have 3 french open titles and a CYGS?) and winning more masters and even another major.

Fed's prime did not meet up with Djoker's prime or Murray's prime... if anything it's shocking that way post prime federer can still beat and or make it REALLY uncomfortable for these prime 25 y.o. players.


If Federer chooses to continue playing, then yes, he's going to end up with a -H2H against the other top 3.

Should he quit?

what's better... quitting now to preserve H2H? quitting in 2010 to preserve H2H? or getting possibly another major (which is entirely possible)

[ledwix]

Originally Posted by Nadalgaenger

Rafa won most of his slams against the GOAT!! He beat the GOAT on his favorite surface! In 2008, Fed was supremely dominant at Wimby until the Nadal match--he hadn't dropped a set going into that showdown!

Nadal did to the GOAT what the GOAT could never do to him--knock him off on his favorite surface. Sorry, but Fed's FO title was a bit of a joke--he didn't beat a single top player on clay and almost lost to Haas and Del Potro along the way.

So? If we compare to Fed, Nadal's resume off clay is incredibly weak sauce. Mainly he is the clay GOAT which is why he has so many slams. If he wins only 4 majors across 3 of the 4 majors, that is not the kind of versatile greatness of someone who is better than another player who at his worst three slams has won a total of 10 titles.

Nadal never went into his career thinking, "I want to have positive H2Hs against everyone." He wanted to win titles and become a prestigious champion, which he has done very well. But Federer winning more titles than Nadal each of the last two years even though Federer is "done" according to so many should tell you something about greatness.

Also, if you really wanna go there, then Nadal's three slams in 2010 were joke draws. But that would be stupid to say also; talking about draws like this is silly because draws balance out over time and Federer got to five slam finals on every slam. Not like he hasn't proven himself lol.

[Cup8489]

Originally Posted by Nadalgaenger

There is so much Nadal hate on here it isn't funny.

Why is it so hard for people to recognize him as an all-time great. He currently cannot be called GOAT, but if he can come back and win another 4 or so majors then the conversation has to be started again.

well no crap. ur the one who just said he is GOAT already...

epic fail

[Vrad]

Originally Posted by zam88

If federer could have only:

known he could not beat rafa on clay and thus tanked almost all clay semis except for the 09 RG when Rafa was knocked out, and then quit overall after 2010 AO he could have had +H2H against Djoker and Murray (and a near even record against rafa) and 16 majors.

That's the problem with posts like The OP's. They imply Federer would have been a greater player if only he lost more, and earlier in tournaments.

Which is why it is so easy to just dismiss them, because that premise is clearly laughable.

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by coloskier

Throw out all the matches on clay and you'll get the real head to head.

Lol, no you wouldn't.

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

It's not like Federer has played Djokovic Murray Nadal mostly after his prime years LOL...

Connors had a losing record against Borg, McEnroe and Lendl because he kept playing until he was 40 or so and he was respectively 4, 7 and 8 years older than them. Let's see what stuff Nadal Djokovic and Murray come up with when they are 30.

Uhm, Fed has had a losing record against Nadal since he was in his peak, and I believe that is the case with Murray also...

[Hitman]

Yep. Nadal is GOAT.

[mike danny]

how come the weak era works for fed and not for rafa? they played against the exact same opposition from 2005 and federer has still won more slams. also if fed thrived in a weak era how does this make nadal's win so great if he beat the overrated federer?

[Cup8489]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Lol, no you wouldn't.



Uhm, Fed has had a losing record against Nadal since he was in his peak, and I believe that is the case with Murray also...

And yet... 17>11>6>1......

[mike danny]

i am sure murray would throw all his 11 victories for more grand slams and a better record than 1-6 in grand slam finals. so he has a winning H2H over federer. good for him. at least federer does not have such a pathetic record in slam finals

[Anaconda]

Hrbaty says hi!

[tennis_pro]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Uhm, Fed has had a losing record against Nadal since he was in his peak, and I believe that is the case with Murray also...

Yea out of 20 matches Federer played Murray exact 2 times before 2008. Unless you consider post 2008 as prime Federer which I'm sure you do as you want Hafa's victories in him in 2008/2009 to be more valuable.

With Nadal the h2h was close at the end of 2007 as well with Nadal leading just 8-6 and 6 of his wins on clay obviously (like you expect anything different than Nadal piling up the h2h's thanks to clay).