Rafa's W/L record - can he sustain it?

[tenniselbow1]

Originally Posted by DRII

Riiight, having only one clay slam (in particular one where the best clay courter ever was injured and beaten early) out of 16 is a far more balanced than having two hardcourt slams among 10 slams overall...

Psyche!

Please get some sunlight.

OMG another slap in face GIF needed. Who are these tards? Do they enjoy vocalising opinions that 1/100th of the tennis world actually believe?

[DRII]

Originally Posted by monfed

Slam distribution of Ralph isn't GOAT worthy IMO. Even if he gets to 11 slams with 7 RGs, most would consider him below Borg. He's also too limited as a player to be considered a GOAT.

Yea Ok...

but 1 RG is acceptable in your view to be GOAT???

Hypocrisy at its finest!

[DRII]

Originally Posted by tenniselbow1

OMG another slap in face GIF needed. Who are these tards? Do they enjoy vocalising opinions that 1/100th of the tennis world actually believe?

Try and counter my assertion, instead of being idiotic!

How is having just 1 clay slam out of 16 more balanced than having 2 HC slams out of 10?

[tenniselbow1]

Originally Posted by DRII

Try and counter my assertion, instead of being idiotic!

How is having just 1 clay slam out of 16 more balanced than having 2 HC slams out of 10?

Dude this is amateur level discussion, not worth my time. Read up on this before posting garbage. I could rip you a new orifice with this one.

[monfed]

Originally Posted by DRII

Yea Ok...

but 1 RG is acceptable in your view to be GOAT???

Hypocrisy at its finest!

Yea even if you use the somewhat absurd logic of clubbing AO AND USO together as one surface JUST because it's a hardcourt, Ralph only has 2 but he was losing to basically everyone there. Federer OTOH was losing mainly to Ralph on clay and has his 1 RG.

Furthermore, Federer has one shot of winning a clay slam while Ralph has two shots of winning a HC slam,using your own dumb logic.

But the most telling statistic is that Federer on his second best surface namely grass(which is debatable in itself) has 6 slams. Ralph OTOH has 2.

Sorry Ralph maybe the CLAY GOAT/CO-CLAY GOAT at this point. GOAT/CO-GOAT he is not.

[PSNELKE]

Originally Posted by monfed

Yea even if you use the somewhat absurd logic of clubbing AO AND USO together as one surface JUST because it's a hardcourt, Ralph only has 2 but he was losing to basically everyone there. Federer OTOH was losing mainly to Ralph on clay and has his 1 RG.

Furthermore, Federer has one shot of winning a clay slam while Ralph has two shots of winning a HC slam,using your own dumb logic.

But the most telling statistic is that Federer on his second best surface namely grass(which is debatable in itself) has 6 slams. Ralph OTOH has 2.

Sorry Ralph maybe the CLAY GOAT/CO-CLAY GOAT at this point. GOAT/CO-GOAT he is not.

At this point, this guy actually has a point.

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Ralph is clayGOAT#2 behind Borg at this point.

[MichaelNadal]

Originally Posted by DjokovicForTheWin

Ralph is clayGOAT#2 behind Borg at this point.

That's arguable.

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Originally Posted by MichaelNadal

That's arguable.

How? Borg played in a tougher era as lauded by you ***** and he has one more slam. Moreover the transition from clay to grass in his day was much harder.

[kragster]

Originally Posted by DjokovicForTheWin

How? Borg played in a tougher era as lauded by you ***** and he has one more slam. Moreover the transition from clay to grass in his day was much harder.

Umm, Borg does not have 1 more RG. He has 6 RG like Rafa. He has 1 more OVERALL slam but the discussion was about being clay goat. Borg is obviously ahead in the overall GOAT picture, on clay it's pretty even . In fact after this 8th MC and looking at Rafa's superior Win %, the edge would go to Rafa. Unless you want to bring in your subjective 'weak era' theories. In which case we may as well argue that Borg > Fed

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Originally Posted by kragster

Umm, Borg does not have 1 more RG. He has 6 RG like Rafa. He has 1 more OVERALL slam but the discussion was about being clay goat. Borg is obviously ahead in the overall GOAT picture, on clay it's pretty even . In fact after this 8th MC and looking at Rafa's superior Win %, the edge would go to Rafa. Unless you want to bring in your subjective 'weak era' theories. In which case we may as well argue that Borg > Fed

Yeah ok on clay pretty even although slight edge to Borg since he only lost to another clay slam winner at FO. I don't believe in any weak/strong era stupidities.

[borg number one]

Folks tend to downplay Borg's winning %, but notice that at 25, Nadal is still just below Borg and as for Federer, was there ever a time when he was at 82-83% during his career (say at 25-27?). Plus, look at Borg's match totals. Even at 25-26 he had played many more matches in total than Nadal. To answer the OP's question, I do think that Nadal can sustain his winning percentage. He is now well established as a top player, not climbing the ranks. Folks forget that sometimes. It's going to be years before he really drops much in the rankings in my opinion and during these next few years, I think he'll continue to win plenty.

[DRII]

Originally Posted by tenniselbow1

Dude this is amateur level discussion, not worth my time. Read up on this before posting garbage. I could rip you a new orifice with this one.

If you don't have a point to make; be silent.

[abmk]

Originally Posted by DRII

Riiight, having only one clay slam (in particular one where the best clay courter ever was injured and beaten early) out of 16 is a far more balanced than having two hardcourt slams among 10 slams overall...

Psyche!

Please get some sunlight.

yes, federer's is more balanced , considering there are 2 Hc slams and one clay slam ( duuuuuuh ) ......federer has as many finals at RG as rafa has @ AO and USO combined ....

federer has as many masters on clay as rafa has on HC .....

and also here's another reminder : rafa's indoor record is pretty poor. Federer's isn't anywhere .....

@ bold part: where the best claycourter was beaten ??? so ?? does everyone else also have to go through this best claycourter to win slams or for them to be considered legit ???? yeah, we get it, the likes of borg, kuerten, bruguera, lendl, wilander etc ..... suck on clay .....

[TMF]

Fed's accomplishments is more complete/balance on all surfaces than Nadal. If you take away all Nadal's RG and Fed's Wimbledon, Nadal is not that great, he would be like another Courier while Fed is still a top tier players. Nadal has never defend a hc title, never won WTF and only won 1 indoor.

Fed and Nadal both have their best/worst surface, but Fed is the 2nd best player on clay while Nadal is not on hc. His title drought carry on for nearly a year, and it had to take a clay event for him to break the drought. I can't even remember when the last time he won an event outside of clay.

[Cesc Fabregas]

Originally Posted by TMF

Fed's accomplishments is more complete/balance on all surfaces than Nadal. If you take away all Nadal's RG and Fed's Wimbledon, Nadal is not that great, he would be like another Courier while Fed is still a top tier players. Nadal has never defend a hc title, never won WTF and only won 1 indoor.

Fed and Nadal both have their best/worst surface, but Fed is the 2nd best player on clay while Nadal is not on hc. His title drought carry on for nearly a year, and it had to take a clay event for him to break the drought. I can't even remember when the last time he won an event outside of clay.

When was the last time Federer won an event outside hc?

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Originally Posted by Cesc Fabregas

When was the last time Federer won an event outside hc?

Outside HC, Federer wins IW2012.

[FlashFlare11]

Originally Posted by Cesc Fabregas

When was the last time Federer won an event outside hc?

Well, you have to take into account that the clay season is about 6 weeks long, with the grass season lasting just 3-4 weeks. The rest of the tour is played on hard courts. Federer has less chances to win on clay or grass than Nadal has on HC in one year.

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by FlashFlare11

Well, you have to take into account that the clay season is about 6 weeks long, with the grass season lasting just 3-4 weeks. The rest of the tour is played on hard courts. Federer has less chances to win on clay or grass than Nadal has on HC in one year.

The same holds true about the slam count.

[FlashFlare11]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

The same holds true about the slam count.

While that's true, I, personally, look at each slam individually, because the Australian Open and U.S. Open are both different tournaments with surfaces that aren't similar. This is why I see Roger's domination of grass (Wimbledon) greater than "9 hard court" slams because those 9 came from two slams, while his 6 came at one slam.