At their best, who would win?

[NatF]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

NatF, Nadal less Slams: A main factor might be that Nadal is four years younger than Federer. Have you forgotten this?

I concede that Rosewall has negative balances against Gonzalez and Laver, two GOAT candidates. Muscles was unlucky to be four years older than Laver. He was already 28 when they started their (arguable) 182 match streak.

Nadal has less slams for the same age as well, have you forgotten that? Besides that Nadal was an early bloomer compared to Federer. It's arguable what's more impressive winning one slam a year for most of your career or a period of sustain dominance which is much short like Federer's.

Interesting that you mention Laver and Gonzalez as GOAT candidates, Nadal is the clay court GOAT and also 5 years younger than Federer. Considering most of their matches were on clay does that not explain away the H2H? You seemed to think a similar situation with Laver was excusable.

Gonzalez was 6 years older than Rosewall, what's your excuse for that deficit?

[ARFED]

It is undisputed among a vast majority of experts that the weakest era of all time was the pro ranks early to mid 60`s. Crippled Hoad, Baby Laver (since 1963) and part time player "granny" Gonzalez were the best those obscure times had to offer. No wonder how a player with no serve at all could dominate such field. Well to be fair he could dominate only 2 years. What a beast he was.

[90's Clay]

Originally Posted by NatF

If Nadal was better than Federer why does he have less slams? Surely if he beat Federer due to his superiority then he would have been going deeper in HC slams and winning more of those tournaments?

Also you should remember that Nadal only leads the h2h on clay. Otherwise it's 8-6 to Federer. I doubt anyone who faced Nadal 14 times on clay would have a positive h2h versus him.

Did Rosewall not have a negative h2h withany one player?

The only reason I believe Nadal is not the current slam record holder over Roger right now.. Its one simple thing.. INJURIES. Fed has been 100 times more fortunate in that regard. Fed never misses a slam because of his near perfect health..

Nadal's peak was cut short (Fed's wasn't) due to injuries.. And Nadal is injured which may have cost him so more slams this year

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by NatF

Nadal has less slams for the same age as well, have you forgotten that? Besides that Nadal was an early bloomer compared to Federer. It's arguable what's more impressive winning one slam a year for most of your career or a period of sustain dominance which is much short like Federer's.

Interesting that you mention Laver and Gonzalez as GOAT candidates, Nadal is the clay court GOAT and also 5 years younger than Federer. Considering most of their matches were on clay does that not explain away the H2H? You seemed to think a similar situation with Laver was excusable.

Gonzalez was 6 years older than Rosewall, what's your excuse for that deficit?

I can agree in some points.

There is no general excuse for Rosewall's negative balance. I just could argue that Gonzalez was in his prime and Rosewall shortly before when the mostly met.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by ARFED

It is undisputed among a vast majority of experts that the weakest era of all time was the pro ranks early to mid 60`s. Crippled Hoad, Baby Laver (since 1963) and part time player "granny" Gonzalez were the best those obscure times had to offer. No wonder how a player with no serve at all could dominate such field. Well to be fair he could dominate only 2 years. What a beast he was.

The beast are you, ARFED. You forget that Rosewall was at least Co. No1 in several other years including as late as 1970 and 1971 against toughest opposition.

You forgot mention names like Sedgman, Segura, Trabert, Gimeno, Buchholz, Olmedo, Cooper,Anderson....

Are you Dan Lobb that you call Hoad crippled?

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

The only reason I believe Nadal is not the current slam record holder over Roger right now.. Its one simple thing.. INJURIES. Fed has been 100 times more fortunate in that regard. Fed never misses a slam because of his near perfect health..

Nadal's peak was cut short (Fed's wasn't) due to injuries.. And Nadal is injured which may have cost him so more slams this year

90's Clay, Thanks for this argument oft forgotten by some people.

[NatF]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

The only reason I believe Nadal is not the current slam record holder over Roger right now.. Its one simple thing.. INJURIES. Fed has been 100 times more fortunate in that regard. Fed never misses a slam because of his near perfect health..

Nadal's peak was cut short (Fed's wasn't) due to injuries.. And Nadal is injured which may have cost him so more slams this year

Nadal's also got a huge clay skew with his slams though. Federer is more balanced (for the moment at least).

Hypotheticals don't really matter here man, if Federer took his chances against Nadal the h2h could look very different. Federer has had injuries before and mono in early 08. Maybe they weren't serious enough for him to miss slams but they could have affected his peak performance there. Being injury free is a positive for Federer. We don't know if Nadal would have won many more slam wins if he competed. The extra mileage may have come back to bite him in the *** later on in his career anyway.

[forzamilan90]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

A new face of Forza?

no, I am calling out kiki on his b.s. regarding Kodes.

[forzamilan90]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

Forza, it would be a plus in his record but would probably not devalue my argument.

I suppose winning the next 10 majors might be enough to devalue your argument

[pc1]

Originally Posted by forzamilan90

I suppose winning the next 10 majors might be enough to devalue your argument

Of course and even BobbyOne would admit that. But we can all say the same thing if Djokovic won the next ten majors or Nadal. I think the record for winning majors that they entered is nine by Maureen Connolly. Don Budge won six majors in a row period as did Martina Navratilova. Bill Tilden won eight majors in a row he entered, nine if you include the World Hard Court in 1921 which was a clay major since the French was only open to French people in those days.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by forzamilan90

no, I am calling out kiki on his b.s. regarding Kodes.

Forzamilan90 my friend,

Kiki is an admirer of Kodes and originally it perhaps annoyed me that I thought he overvalued Kodes. However given that he is often jesting about it I actually have begun to enjoy it when he mentions Kodes. So in honor of Kiki, I bow in respect in Kodes.

In other words, give Kiki a break.

[forzamilan90]

Originally Posted by pc1

Forzamilan90 my friend,

Kiki is an admirer of Kodes and originally it perhaps annoyed me that I thought he overvalued Kodes. However given that he is often jesting about it I actually have begun to enjoy it when he mentions Kodes. So in honor of Kiki, I bow in respect in Kodes.

In other words, give Kiki a break.

I know but you saw he tried throwing Borg, Connors in the there, yet all Kodes faced that could be labeled an an all time great, was Nastase in those 3 slams, never mind the depleted fields. I know he'll try to somehow twist that around, but still it had to be done. I'd say you, krosero are a few of the notable residents of this forum over here that are non-biased. A few other notable ones, however, not so much.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by pc1

Of course and even BobbyOne would admit that. But we can all say the same thing if Djokovic won the next ten majors or Nadal. I think the record for winning majors that they entered is nine by Maureen Connolly. Don Budge won six majors in a row period as did Martina Navratilova. Bill Tilden won eight majors in a row he entered, nine if you include the World Hard Court in 1921 which was a clay major since the French was only open to French people in those days.

pc1, Rosewall won nine majors where he participated, all against tough competition. He was 42:1 in matches of big events in the 1960 to 1963 period, if we include strong Kramer Cup. He's only blame came against Tony Trabert in the 1961 Kramer Cup. This told to those who use to belittle Rosewall's dominance in that time.

[forzamilan90]

Originally Posted by pc1

Of course and even BobbyOne would admit that. But we can all say the same thing if Djokovic won the next ten majors or Nadal. I think the record for winning majors that they entered is nine by Maureen Connolly. Don Budge won six majors in a row period as did Martina Navratilova. Bill Tilden won eight majors in a row he entered, nine if you include the World Hard Court in 1921 which was a clay major since the French was only open to French people in those days.

you know why I said that and how I meant it

[pc1]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

pc1, Rosewall won nine majors where he participated, all against tough competition. He was 42:1 in matches of big events in the 1960 to 1963 period, if we include strong Kramer Cup. He's only blame came against Tony Trabert in the 1961 Kramer Cup. This told to those who use to belittle Rosewall's dominance in that time.

BobbyOne,

I was just using classic majors as a point of reference for everyone. Rosewall's achievement of nine straight majors with great players competing is a great achievement. A 42-1 record is great and it was against tremendous players like Hoad, Sedgman, Trabert, Segura, Olmedo, Gonzalez, Cooper, Anderson, Gimeno, Buchholz, Laver. That's not a bad lineup of opponents. Rosewall did play a number of them several times during that streak.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by forzamilan90

you know why I said that and how I meant it

Okay I understand. Actually I can almost see you smiling as you wrote that. lol.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by pc1

BobbyOne,

I was just using classic majors as a point of reference for everyone. Rosewall's achievement of nine straight majors with great players competing is a great achievement. A 42-1 record is great and it was against tremendous players like Hoad, Sedgman, Trabert, Segura, Olmedo, Gonzalez, Cooper, Anderson, Gimeno, Buchholz, Laver. That's not a bad lineup of opponents. Rosewall did play a number of them several times during that streak.

pc1, I understand you talked only about Grand Slam tournaments. Thanks that you agree Rosewall had a sensational streak (even though you have not used the word "sensational").

By the way, I believe that Tilden would have had an even greater run in majors if he would have participated in the Australian Chmpionships and more often at Wimbledon and if French Championships would have started earlier!

[forzamilan90]

Originally Posted by pc1

Okay I understand. Actually I can almost see you smiling as you wrote that. lol.

[ARFED]

Originally Posted by BobbyOne

The beast are you, ARFED. You forget that Rosewall was at least Co. No1 in several other years including as late as 1970 and 1971 against toughest opposition.

You forgot mention names like Sedgman, Segura, Trabert, Gimeno, Buchholz, Olmedo, Cooper,Anderson....

Are you dan Lobb that you call Hoad crippled?

If mighty muscles was co number 1 in 1970 and 1971 then Fed was co number 1 in 2003 and 2012.
Please do me a favour and don`t let the angry austrian come out of you.
Sedgman, Segura were great players but again, how tough were in the 60`s??
Perhaps you can`t cope with the idea that your darling wasn`t good enough to top any all time great during their respective primes. Was he?
Did he toped prime Gonzalez, prime Hoad, prime Laver??

Face it Bobby, Little Kenny= weak era champ. But hey, i`ll give you this, during Kenny`s reign as world number 1 he faced a tougher field than Renshaw.

[BobbyOne]

Originally Posted by ARFED

If mighty muscles was co number 1 in 1970 and 1971 then Fed was co number 1 in 2003 and 2012.
Please do me a favour and don`t let the angry austrian come out of you.
Sedgman, Segura were great players but again, how tough were in the 60`s??
Perhaps you can`t cope with the idea that your darling wasn`t good enough to top any all time great during their respective primes. Was he?
Did he toped prime Gonzalez, prime Hoad, prime Laver??

Face it Bobby, Little Kenny= weak era champ. But hey, i`ll give you this, during Kenny`s reign as world number 1 he faced a tougher field than Renshaw.

ARFED, I'm not angry, I'm disappointed.

What is an angry Austrian? HitLer? I have nothing to do with that man.

SEdgman had two matchpoints against prime Lavert at the 1965 WEmbley. SEgura was a top five player through 1962 when he was 41, an age when your darling will enrole at a senior's home.

You and your ARmada friends blame me for critisizing Federer but you belittle Rosewall in a very strange way. Good night