Remember: 4 sets in 6 tries, +15 years

clayqueen · Sep 16, 2019

Rhino said:
But he's won more slams, more titles, and more Wimbledons (the most important slam). And more WTF. And he's held the #1 ranking for way longer. And most people in the world see Fed as the GOAT. Plus even Nadal himself sees Fed as the greater player. As do the majority of pros.
Plus he was the best player in the world on clay in 2009, right in the middle of Nadals peak.

Fake GOAT

chjtennis · Sep 16, 2019

The_Order said:
LMAO not even what I said.

I said Nadal's speed has declined. Simple as that, he's not the running machine he used to be...

Federer's game has declined just as much. Let's not talk about decline as an excuse because if anyone declined more, it should be Fed.

KINGROGER · Sep 16, 2019

Rafa24 said:
The best part is Fed only has a 11-7 set lead on Rafa at his best slam.

Rafa leads fed 11-6 at the only hard court slam they have met at.

The false goat about to be overthrown by rafa and djoker. Really hope rafa can get 20 and 21 this year.

YOure really invested in this huh

kevaninho · Sep 16, 2019

ChrisRF said:
Also Mayweather is not comparable to a GOAT in any sport. He is a middleweight/welterweight boxer, which means he is better than anyone in a very small range of weight (like 5 kg). Firstly that makes the whole competition extremely small compared to sports with one single field and secondly he is lucky that weight classes exist at all, because anyone knows he would easily get knocked out by any good heavyweight.

It’s like saying Schwartzman is GOAT because he is the best tennis player with a height between 1.67 and 1.72 by a bigger margin than Federer in his "height class".

What I want to say: There are many sports where some disadvantages of the body are just as "unfair" as in boxing, but anyone just says that having the perfect body is part of the sport. I mean, it would also be "fair" to have ski jumping for fat people, but nevertheless it doesn’t exist.

What the hell are you talking about ?

Schwartzmann has won absolutely nothing, so regardless of you trying to find a comparison with Mayweather, that is probably the stupidest answer you could have gave.

kevaninho · Sep 16, 2019

KINGROGER said:
Total slam titles
Total Wimbledon, US open, AO, YEC, Cincinnati, IW titles
Total overall titles
Total slam finals
Total weeks at number 1

Etc

Oh yeah mentioning stats like total slam finals, when your guy has been on the tour years longer

KINGROGER · Sep 16, 2019

kevaninho said:
Oh yeah mentioning stats like total slam finals, when your guy has been on the tour years longer

Well. I was replying to the troll who said Fed is average in all departments... so I wonder what that makes every other tennis player outside of Rafa on clay

ChrisRF · Sep 16, 2019

kevaninho said:
What the hell are you talking about ?

Schwartzmann has won absolutely nothing, so regardless of you trying to find a comparison with Mayweather, that is probably the stupidest answer you could have gave.

No, that is exactly right.

If we look at what is common custom in all kinds of sports, Mayweather is unbelievably lucky that boxing has weight classes. Outright he is far away from even belonging to the best boxers in the world, because boxer from heigher classes would easily knock him out.

Now I understand that he can be one of the best just for technical aspects, but in other sports that is irrelevant, because anyone says that having the perfect body for the sport is part of being great. That’s why I brought up Schwartzman, because he is so small that he has decisive disadvantages in tennis (especially due to a weak serve). So if tennis would be like boxing, there would probably be heigth classes.

If Schwartzman then dominates let’s say the class of people from 1.67 m to 1.72 m clearer than Federer or Nadal their heigth class, then with the same logic he would have to be called GOAT as if someone calls Mayweather GOAT for totally dominating a weight class.

You said Schwartzman has never won anything, but surely he would if tennis would be organized like boxing. It is very reasonable to make this comparison. If anything, he is nearer to the absolute top in his sport than Mayweather.

Also remember in boxing the competition of course is extremely small if every 3-5 kg a new weight class begins, and that’s the case in the lighter classes. I just wanted to make clear how laughable it would be to call someone like Mayweather GOAT.

Imagine other sports (for example tennis) being divided in 15-20 divisions, and each of them not crowning one champion, but up to 4.

Rafa24 · Sep 16, 2019

KINGROGER said:
YOure really invested in this huh

"kingroger"

Rhino · Sep 16, 2019

With the greatest of respect, to keep this "debate" going is pretty stupid really. Federer and Nadal are both great champions and we are EXTREMELY lucky to have them in our sport.
To attempt to put either of them down is just petty and suggests that you are not even really a tennis fan. Actually this thread reminds me of a conversation between my two kids (aged 7 and 9).

UnderratedSlam · Sep 16, 2019

Lleytonstation said:
We get it. Rafa dominates Fed on clay. Congrats.

Every time you bring Fed down, you lessen the other guys... every single time.

If Fed is not that good, then those wins were not that great, and the losses? Ouch.

That´s what RF fans don´t seem to understand. Saying RF isn´t GOAT does NOT mean he stinks. It just means he isn´t best ever. Is that so difficult to understand? Can you not remain fans of a player who isn´t GOAT? If so then you root for him for all the wrong reasons.

Lleytonstation · Sep 16, 2019

UnderratedSlam said:
That´s what RF fans don´t seem to understand. Saying RF isn´t GOAT does NOT mean he stinks. It just means he isn´t best ever. Is that so difficult to understand? Can you not remain fans of a player who isn´t GOAT? If so then you root for him for all the wrong reasons.

I have never said he was "tiger" ever. I also don't believe in it and never have. But if you want to that is fine, but then the slam count is what matters.

You are right, a true fan should not care if they are not the best, as I never thought he would pass Sampras when I started watching him in 05. I will be completely happy if Fed ends up in third as well (of course what fan wouldn't want their guy to have the most slams), as I like Fed because he is Fed and I enjoy the ride he has given me, even the whole 4 and 0 and 1 and 5. He has also given me things like AO17 and 5 consecutive USO and WC.

Have I ever said Fed was the best ever? If you are going to call people out, at least get your facts straight.

That being said, look around the threads, I have seen not a few but many say Fed is not a top 10 ATG or even top 7 HC player of all time. Don't act like they are saying better, they are saying Fed is not that good.

The_Order · Sep 16, 2019

chjtennis said:
Federer's game has declined just as much. Let's not talk about decline as an excuse because if anyone declined more, it should be Fed.

It depends on which aspects have declined.

Nadal's game was built around his speed. He's done well to adapt a more aggressive style in his older years but once that speed declined, that is a killer for his chances against Fed on faster surfaces.

Tenez101 · Sep 16, 2019

OldschoolKIaus said:
For a clay court pusher, 7 majors is a nice resume for the Nadal.

I rate Rafa as a strong 4.5

chjtennis · Sep 16, 2019

The_Order said:
It depends on which aspects have declined.

Nadal's game was built around his speed. He's done well to adapt a more aggressive style in his older years but once that speed declined, that is a killer for his chances against Fed on faster surfaces.

Nadal is not one-dimensional player whose only strength is speed. His game declined in all areas a little as he aged, just like Federer's. V Fed, it was more about the match up issue. Even Nadal himself admitted in an interview that he doesn't use the tactic of going to Fed's BH anymore now that it has become different.

The_Order · Sep 16, 2019

chjtennis said:
Nadal is not one-dimensional player whose only strength is speed. His game declined in all areas a little as he aged, just like Federer's. V Fed, it was more about the match up issue. Even Nadal himself admitted in an interview that he doesn't use the tactic of going to Fed's BH anymore now that it has become different.

Not what I said. Just pointing out it was a very important weapon against Fed's game.

Sure, going to the bh was a successful tactic, but not the only reason he was a tough match up for Fed. The other reason was he would get to shots that Fed wouldn't expect and return them with interest which in turn would frustrate Fed and force him to go for more, generating more errors off his racket. Look at the AO12 SF. Fed was hitting the ball quite well in the first set and a half. Once Rafa hit a cc passing shot from the players entrance it clearly rattled Fed and Nadal then took 3 sets in a row.

terribleIVAN · Sep 16, 2019

The_Order said:
Not what I said. Just pointing out it was a very important weapon against Fed's game.

Sure, going to the bh was a successful tactic, but not the only reason he was a tough match up for Fed. The other reason was he would get to shots that Fed wouldn't expect and return them with interest which in turn would frustrate Fed and force him to go for more, generating more errors off his racket. Look at the AO12 SF. Fed was hitting the ball quite well in the first set and a half. Once Rafa hit a cc passing shot from the players entrance it clearly rattled Fed and Nadal then took 3 sets in a row.

Fed cannot maintain his first-strike tennis game against the very best for more than 3-4 sets. Rafa saps his energy the further the match advances.

That's why Fed always blows Rafa or Novak off the court in the first set, then loses the match.

Now with Rafa's decline, things have changed, but it was always the physical factor that sank Fed.

ForehandRF · Sep 17, 2019

terribleIVAN said:
Fed cannot maintain his first-strike tennis game against the very best for more than 3-4 sets. Rafa saps his energy the further the match advances.

That's why Fed always blows Rafa or Novak off the court in the first set, then loses the match.

Now with Rafa's decline, things have changed, but it was always the physical factor that sank Fed.

What you are saying here is that in modern tennis physicality and defence are more rewarded than anything else.No wonder with the balls and surfaces of today.Back in the 2000s, lighter balls and lower bounce, especially on hardcourts, rewarded more Federer's style of play.So it allowed him to hit through his opponent's defences, to ram winners down their throats, so to speak.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 17, 2019

CYGS said:
The other way around. Every time you call Fed the GOAT, it makes Djokodal gods.

Nadal beat young Fed, Weakeraovic beat him at 35 for 10 of his slams. Stop posting, Djokovic won most his majors in a WEAK ERA.

Deleted member 307496 · Sep 17, 2019

Breakpointerer said:
All I see is excellence.
You can't call someone average when they have achieved as much as Fed has, regardless of how much you may hate them.

Well she's the idiot that said Agassi didn't have a major on clay rofl.

chjtennis · Sep 17, 2019

The_Order said:
Not what I said. Just pointing out it was a very important weapon against Fed's game.

Sure, going to the bh was a successful tactic, but not the only reason he was a tough match up for Fed. The other reason was he would get to shots that Fed wouldn't expect and return them with interest which in turn would frustrate Fed and force him to go for more, generating more errors off his racket. Look at the AO12 SF. Fed was hitting the ball quite well in the first set and a half. Once Rafa hit a cc passing shot from the players entrance it clearly rattled Fed and Nadal then took 3 sets in a row.

Nadal's money shot v Fed was always heavy topspin FH to Fed's BH. If you have watched all of their matches prior to 2017, that's so obvious. Now that that advantage has evaporated, Nadal just can't beat Fed anywhere that's not clay, and their FO match was actually quite close this year in the 1st 2 sets.

BeatlesFan · Sep 17, 2019

UnderratedSlam said:
That´s what RF fans don´t seem to understand. Saying RF isn´t GOAT does NOT mean he stinks. It just means he isn´t best ever. Is that so difficult to understand? Can you not remain fans of a player who isn´t GOAT? If so then you root for him for all the wrong reasons.

Multiple Fed fans here have been tennis fans since the 1980's or even earlier. We all rooted for players who were never GOAT and are just fine with that. How do you explain the Fed fans here who have been rooting from him since 2000, 2005, 2006... when he wasn't GOAT and Laver/Sampras were? The non-Fed fans endlessly speak for us and continually get it wrong. They also erroneously claim "Fed fans are changing the goalposts." Wrong again. If and when Nadal gets 21 slams, he's GOAT in my book and in the minds of many other Fed fans.

Deleted member 688153 · Sep 17, 2019

terribleIVAN said:
That's the number of sets Fed managed to win vs Nadal at RG in 6 meetings.

And 4 of these meetings were when Fed was in his absolute prime while Nadal was just beginning to enter his.

Lol at the claims of Goathood.

Signed and sealed by a big list of everyone who's opinion all sane people here definitely absolutely value and trust, I see.

PerilousPear · Sep 17, 2019

Remember: 2 seeded players below top 20 en route to a grand slam.

kevaninho · Sep 17, 2019

ChrisRF said:
No, that is exactly right.

If we look at what is common custom in all kinds of sports, Mayweather is unbelievably lucky that boxing has weight classes. Outright he is far away from even belonging to the best boxers in the world, because boxer from heigher classes would easily knock him out.

Now I understand that he can be one of the best just for technical aspects, but in other sports that is irrelevant, because anyone says that having the perfect body for the sport is part of being great. That’s why I brought up Schwartzman, because he is so small that he has decisive disadvantages in tennis (especially due to a weak serve). So if tennis would be like boxing, there would probably be heigth classes.

If Schwartzman then dominates let’s say the class of people from 1.67 m to 1.72 m clearer than Federer or Nadal their heigth class, then with the same logic he would have to be called GOAT as if someone calls Mayweather GOAT for totally dominating a weight class.

You said Schwartzman has never won anything, but surely he would if tennis would be organized like boxing. It is very reasonable to make this comparison. If anything, he is nearer to the absolute top in his sport than Mayweather.

Also remember in boxing the competition of course is extremely small if every 3-5 kg a new weight class begins, and that’s the case in the lighter classes. I just wanted to make clear how laughable it would be to call someone like Mayweather GOAT.

Imagine other sports (for example tennis) being divided in 15-20 divisions, and each of them not crowning one champion, but up to 4.

So a physical sport where you are trying to hit each other is the same as standing at the other side of a court and hitting a tennis ball to your opponent?

Im pretty sure ive given both sports a good go in my youth, and id much fancy my chances more at tennis than boxing against someone 6 inches taller and 50lbs heavier.

I understand what you are trying to say regards to Mayweather, as of course he would be destroyed by heavyweights. But the comparison that a boxing height and weight difference being similar to a tennis height n weight difference, is way off the mark.

UnderratedSlam · Sep 17, 2019

BeatlesFan said:
Multiple Fed fans here have been tennis fans since the 1980's or even earlier. We all rooted for players who were never GOAT and are just fine with that. How do you explain the Fed fans here who have been rooting from him since 2000, 2005, 2006... when he wasn't GOAT and Laver/Sampras were? The non-Fed fans endlessly speak for us and continually get it wrong. They also erroneously claim "Fed fans are changing the goalposts." Wrong again. If and when Nadal gets 21 slams, he's GOAT in my book and in the minds of many other Fed fans.

You know damn well that´s never gonna happen, those 21, that´s why you´re saying this.

Thing is, I know ZERO Fedfans who were his fans before Wimby 2003. It became EASY to attach oneself to him after EVERY expert predicted a huge career for him after he won his debut slam. Not to mention people who became his "fans" in 2004 or 2005 when he was barely ever losing and seemed on his way to win 50 slams. These are the worst Fedfans, the 04-05 ones, because they became his fans just because they were convinced he was unassailable. Once he started showing cracks, they became intolerable and started spewing venom at Rafa and then especially Novak.

I´ve been following pro tennis since the early 90s, plus I´d read a lot about the 70s and 80s. RF fans behaved horribly from 2005 onwards, and that is simply a fact. Obviously, this is just a generaization and does not apply to everyone. You for example have been fairly reasonable with your posts.

terribleIVAN · Sep 17, 2019

Firstservingman said:
Signed and sealed by a big list of everyone who's opinion all sane people here definitely absolutely value and trust, I see.

Nice picture avatar you have there.

Who could that be ?

....

magdalenapratt · Sep 18, 2019

Nole_King · Sep 18, 2019

terribleIVAN said:
Perhaps.

But ask yourself this: if Rafa came on the circuit around 1998, like Fed did, and Fed only came in 2004, what would be the final statistics ?

Rafa would have obtained the same successes as Fed, if even better: he certainly would have made 3-4 channel slams, and would start losing to Fed only around 2008-2009, as Fed needed 4-5 years to enter his prime.

We could be talking 2-3 slams a year for Rafa for 8-9 years, then only 1 a year. The statistics would be insane.

Or even 1-2 grand schlems for Rafa !

Since turning 30 Rafa is 1-5 against Federer. Imagine Nadal, who would be 38 in your hypothetical scenario against a 32 year old Federer.

Bottom line is the present today is due to what happened in past. Don't assume that you could change something in past and it affects events in a linear manner.

volleynets · Sep 18, 2019

terribleIVAN said:
If i could make an argument for the reverse, ie Fed being GOAT, is that he followed his own path without being dominated by a family member or a coach, and developed his game the way he judged best.

Rafa let himself being manipulated/dominated by those around him because he liked the fame it brought, and never cared to break free, even when it became clear it was affecting his performances.

He never truly was his own man like Fed was.

Without Toni Rafa wouldn't be close to where he is today.

terribleIVAN · Sep 18, 2019

volleynets said:
Without Toni Rafa wouldn't be close to where he is today.

With a proper coach after 2011 where it became obvious Tony was clueless how to vanquish Novak, Rafa would sit now at 25 slams, if not more.

volleynets · Sep 19, 2019

terribleIVAN said:
With a proper coach after 2011 where it became obvious Tony was clueless how to vanquish Novak, Rafa would sit now at 25 slams, if not more.

That's a wild guess with no factual basis. No guarantee any coach could help him against Novak. Maybe Nadal would fail to win as many as he has now if he switched from Toni then.

Remember: 4 sets in 6 tries, +15 years

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Hall of Fame

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Talk Tennis Guru

G.O.A.T.

Banned

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Legend

Deleted member 307496

Guest

Deleted member 307496

Guest

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Deleted member 688153

Guest

Professional

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Similar threads