Where do you rank Nadal on the GOAT list?

[fed_rulz]

Originally Posted by timnz

So if Sampras won 4 less Wimbledons and had a Roland Garros title - that would be a better record? (that would leave him with 11 slams like Nadal). Sorry, I don't buy it. Yes, the lack of Roland Garros is a blemish to his record but it isn't the only thing to be counting. Sampras 5 year end championships vs Nadal's 0 year-end championships is big lack on the Nadal side as well. Also the fact that Nadal has only had a dominent record at Roland Garros out of the big 5 tournaments whereas Sampras Dominated Wimbledon, the US Open and the Year end Championships. Because of that Sampras needs to be ahead.

being an "also ran" in 1/4 slams should count heavily against Sampras. In the Nadal vs Sampras case, you could make an argument for either party; it's not as cut and dry as the Federer vs Sampras case.

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by fed_rulz

being an "also ran" in 1/4 slams should count heavily against Sampras. In the Nadal vs Sampras case, you could make an argument for either party; it's not as cut and dry as the Federer vs Sampras case.

Sampras is definitely ahead of Nadal. It's pretty cut and dry in my eyes. Nadal would need a few more slams and, more importantly, a lot more time at No. 1 to catch up.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Netspirit

I am surprised at how Federer still gets ranked equal with Laver despite continuing to win masters, WTF and majors and returning to #1.

I just wonder what he needs to do to finally beat Laver on TT forums - maybe invite and beat Laver in person to get a positive H2H against him.

(Borg on top is just lol. Even Nadal is about to surpass him)

Yeah I know...but that only exist on TTW. Fed can win 20+ slams in the future and his detractors still only see him as the same guy in 2009.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by Netspirit

I am surprised at how Federer still gets ranked equal with Laver despite continuing to win masters, WTF and majors and returning to #1.

I just wonder what he needs to do to finally beat Laver on TT forums - maybe invite and beat Laver in person to get a positive H2H against him.

(Borg on top is just lol. Even Nadal is about to surpass him)

Someone who thinks Laver is GOAT will be asking why Federer is considered on Laver's level when Laver has won 200 tournaments, has 7 years in a row as world number 1, has won 2 Grand Slams and has won a Professional Grand Slam? And Laver isn't the only other player other than Federer who could be GOAT. There are other dominant players for long periods like Gonzales and Tilden. And Borg also has a claim for GOAT. Who else has won 11 majors at 25 years old? Borg eventually walked away due to politics, having played his last major at age 25. Seriously, the only knock on Borg's record is that he failed to win the US Open, despite reaching 4 finals.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by rommil

Rafa plays with himself in between serves

hahahah +1

[kiki]

Originally Posted by timnz

So if Sampras won 4 less Wimbledons and had a Roland Garros title - that would be a better record? (that would leave him with 11 slams like Nadal). Sorry, I don't buy it. Yes, the lack of Roland Garros is a blemish to his record but it isn't the only thing to be counting. Sampras 5 year end championships vs Nadal's 0 year-end championships is big lack on the Nadal side as well. Also the fact that Nadal has only had a dominent record at Roland Garros out of the big 5 tournaments whereas Sampras Dominated Wimbledon, the US Open and the Year end Championships. Because of that Sampras needs to be ahead.

Sampras is far ahead of Nadal, no possible comparison.The level of competition was alos abyssal.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Netspirit

I am surprised at how Federer still gets ranked equal with Laver despite continuing to win masters, WTF and majors and returning to #1.

I just wonder what he needs to do to finally beat Laver on TT forums - maybe invite and beat Laver in person to get a positive H2H against him.

(Borg on top is just lol. Even Nadal is about to surpass him)

3 Grand Slams to 0, easy no?

Nadal´s never got close to any indoor major title, and Borg won 3 of them.He leads Nadal by 3 majors ( who cares about OG???)

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Someone who thinks Laver is GOAT will be asking why Federer is considered on Laver's level when Laver has won 200 tournaments, has 7 years in a row as world number 1, has won 2 Grand Slams and has won a Professional Grand Slam? And Laver isn't the only other player other than Federer who could be GOAT. There are other dominant players for long periods like Gonzales and Tilden. And Borg also has a claim for GOAT. Who else has won 11 majors at 25 years old? Borg eventually walked away due to politics, having played his last major at age 25. Seriously, the only knock on Borg's record is that he failed to win the US Open, despite reaching 4 finals.

Grasping at straws again? Laver's 200 titles have much less weight than an ATP calendar events. I've already stressed this before that many of his events that he won were a 4 man draw, exhibition, no competition at all. Besides, having the most single titles doesn't mean you are more accomplished. Experts have Connors holding the record at 109, but do you think Federer would trade his 75 titles for Connors' 109? Hell no.

Michael Phelps is consider the greatest swimmer before the Olympics got started. Now that he broke the record with 19 medals, he's consider the greatest Olympian. The guy is raising the benchmark. Federer is doing the same thing, and it started after 2009 FO. As he continue to win, he's going to distance himself from the past great players, and Nadal and Nole will also continue to move up from the list of all time great.

[Russeljones]

Originally Posted by TMF

Grasping at straws again? Laver's 200 titles have much less weight than an ATP calendar events. I've already stressed this before that many of his events that he won were a 4 man draw, exhibition, no competition at all. Besides, having the most single titles doesn't mean you are more accomplished. Experts have Connors holding the record at 109, but do you think Federer would trade his 75 titles for Connors' 109? Hell no.

Michael Phelps is consider the greatest swimmer before the Olympics got started. Now that he broke the record with 19 medals, he's consider the greatest Olympian. The guy is raising the benchmark. Federer is doing the same thing, and it started after 2009 FO. As he continue to win, he's going to distance himself from the past great players, and Nadal and Nole will also continue to move up from the list of all time great.

I have to agree with your tennis comments, the 'Greatest Olympian' ones less so.

Laver's accomplishments are ambiguous due to the large number of amateurs he faced whereas Federer's are magnified by the (acclaimed) level of opposition he has faced. The timeline for Borg's accomplishments is not a rasonable GOAT factor. End result matters and he falls (far) short.

[Russeljones]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Someone who thinks Laver is GOAT will be asking why Federer is considered on Laver's level when Laver has won 200 tournaments, has 7 years in a row as world number 1, has won 2 Grand Slams and has won a Professional Grand Slam? And Laver isn't the only other player other than Federer who could be GOAT. There are other dominant players for long periods like Gonzales and Tilden. And Borg also has a claim for GOAT. Who else has won 11 majors at 25 years old? Borg eventually walked away due to politics, having played his last major at age 25. Seriously, the only knock on Borg's record is that he failed to win the US Open, despite reaching 4 finals.

The 200 tournament argument would be like comparing turn of the century boxers (20th) to Tyson, Lennox Lewis and the K brothers. The level of competition and the format should be a whole other discussion. Perhaps we need to come up with a system for indexing pre-Open era achievements.

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by kiki

Sampras is far ahead of Nadal, no possible comparison.The level of competition was alos abyssal.

I agree the 90s had weak competition, but Sampras is still ahead of Nadal despite it.

[Enigma_87]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Someone who thinks Laver is GOAT will be asking why Federer is considered on Laver's level when Laver has won 200 tournaments, has 7 years in a row as world number 1, has won 2 Grand Slams and has won a Professional Grand Slam? And Laver isn't the only other player other than Federer who could be GOAT. There are other dominant players for long periods like Gonzales and Tilden. And Borg also has a claim for GOAT. Who else has won 11 majors at 25 years old? Borg eventually walked away due to politics, having played his last major at age 25. Seriously, the only knock on Borg's record is that he failed to win the US Open, despite reaching 4 finals.

Most of Laver titles came on grass. Back at the time Laver won titles on grass and clay. Federer, Nadal and Agassi won their slams on hard, grass and clay - three surfaces.

Then again, Laver was 173cm. When was the last time a player below 180 won a slam nowadays? Cliche or not, tennis nowadays is much more competitive than 40 yours ago. Then there goes the division between pro and amateur tour.

Nothing to take away from Laver, some of his records may never be bettered, but things are not black and white as it seems...

[kiki]

Originally Posted by tudwell

I agree the 90s had weak competition, but Sampras is still ahead of Nadal despite it.

1990´s was far more competitive than nowadays.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by Enigma_87

Most of Laver titles came on grass. Back at the time Laver won titles on grass and clay. Federer, Nadal and Agassi won their slams on hard, grass and clay - three surfaces.

Then again, Laver was 173cm. When was the last time a player below 180 won a slam nowadays? Cliche or not, tennis nowadays is much more competitive than 40 yours ago. Then there goes the division between pro and amateur tour.

Nothing to take away from Laver, some of his records may never be bettered, but things are not black and white as it seems...

Laver won more indoor titles than grass or clay titles.And he also won the biggest hard court events of his time.Hard courts were not as popular as today, but there were far more indoor events, on wood and on carpet.