Where do you rank Nadal on the GOAT list?
- Thread starter papertank
- Start date
prosealster
Professional
1. Federer
2. Sampras
3. laver
4. nadal
5. Borg
Nadal will almost certainly move further up by the time his career is over
2. Sampras
3. laver
4. nadal
5. Borg
Nadal will almost certainly move further up by the time his career is over
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
mate, I'm a big fan of Djokovic but he will not even be in contention for greatest player to grace the game. I'm not a nadal fan but Nadal will end with more slams and a bigger standing in the game. I wish Novak had actually started playing to his potential back in 2008 after winning the AO, but he left it too late.
You went on about Fed fans being delusional about him winning another slam, but is about as delusional as thinking Federer will win the calendar grand slam next year. :lol:
All this rubbish about nadal destroying the game. I don't like his style of tennis that much, but the point is to win.So if he ends up winning more than Djokovic or even Federer, then he's of a higher standing in the game. That's just a fact.
The GOAT argument will be between Fed, Laver and maybe Nadal as he has way more chance of challenging the greats in terms of records than Djokovic. And I love Djokovic, but saying he's gonna be up there in the top 2 of all time, is as blind as saying Federer is the in the top 2 clay court players or Nadal is in the top 2 grass court players. Djokovic had a 3 slam year beating 2 all time greats - Federer and nadal, and had it harder than they had in their 3 slam years, but overall he hasn't achieved as much and really needs to win the US Open to keep keep some sort of momentum from 2011.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Agree. Djokovic "wasted" 2009 and 2010. If he had started the gluten-free diet before and hadn't try to change his serve or his racket who knows what could've happen. But still, he just turned 25 he can still achieve A LOT. Not like Fed did, but he can have a career like Nadal's imo.
And in the goat argument apart from Fed and Laver, Borg has done enough to be there.
fed_is_GOD
Professional
You must be joking right?? Exactly how many slams did federer DENY Nadal?? 2 wimbledons??
You talk as if federer spanked nadal in every slam final and denied him a million slams.. Am sorry that is not the case.. Nadal lost because of nadal.. because he was not competent enough to show up at the slam finals on other surfaces.. because he was getting murdered by 100+ rankers..
He was just not good on all surfaces.. now he is finally ok but he ran out of steam..
unfortunate for him..Federererer
Banned
I disagree, I think Djokovic will surpass Nadal on the all time list.
Methinks you have no idea what the word "fact" means.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
There's no love for McEnroe in this thread. Sure, on paper 7 slams seem like a small accomplishment vs the 17 of Federer (for example), but McEnroe played in a strong era. He single-handedly terminated Borg's career ferchrissake!
YellowBall77
Banned
Right now, Nadal is probably around 5th.
90's Clay
Banned
Mac loses points IMO because after '84 he didn't win another slam.. Its as though he had his peak, then totally fell off the map
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
No way Nadal is 5th. And no way Federer is 1st.
People have lost historical perspective.
Where's McEnroe? And where is Gonzalez? Connors?
People have lost historical perspective.
Where's McEnroe? And where is Gonzalez? Connors?
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
True. I think JMac has always been very goal oriented and after 1984 it's as if he didn't care enough. Still waiting for somebody to have a 82-3 season thou.
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
In the booth, grave, and champions tour.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
Well, that's funny. But I'm still irked at the lack of historical perspective around here.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
McEnroe and Connors haven't accomplished as much as Federer or Sampras, but you're right in "People have lost historical perspective.", Borg seems to be quite under-rated here.
myalterego
Rookie
Borg isn't "underrated here." Fact is, he's won the same amount of Slams as Nadal but on less surfaces, and could not bring the heat to his competitors as well as Nadal could. He is definitely top 5 GOAT, but he simply doesn't have the resume of Fed, Sampras, Laver, or Nadal.
Laughable about Bill Tilden being above Fed, btw. Same for Don Budge. The dudes were good but man, back then it was pretty much like playing a recreational match in the park and then you won a trophy. The competition just wasn't intense, the pressure to succeed from the media, sponsors, and fans wasn't nearly as high as in the late 70s and beyond.
Laughable about Bill Tilden being above Fed, btw. Same for Don Budge. The dudes were good but man, back then it was pretty much like playing a recreational match in the park and then you won a trophy. The competition just wasn't intense, the pressure to succeed from the media, sponsors, and fans wasn't nearly as high as in the late 70s and beyond.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Less surfaces, but...
-There were different surfaces actually back then...
-He DOMINATED two completely different surfaces (grass and clay)
-He only played 3 slams a year (AO was barely considered a slam back then, a lot of players didn't even play it)
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
Accomplished so much? If I go to the Special Olympics I'm sure I could rack up a few medals. It's all about the field. Federer is the luckiest tennis player ever in that regard.
Not saying Federer is not good, which he obviously is. Just saying that he is not THAT good.
McEnroe would have murdered Fed in the old Wimbledon. Fed doesn't really do S/V that well. He does it better than the rest of the field now because the rest of the field, for the most part, doesn't practice it.
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
What this guy said.
From The Tennis Channel 100 Greatest Tennis player, Mac is ranked #8. That's a great honor be in the top 10.
1 Roger Federer
2 Rod Laver
3 Pete Sampras
4 Rafael Nadal
5 Bjorn Borg
6 Don Budge
7 Andre Agassi
8 John McEnroe
9 Jimmy Connors
10 Bill Tilden
Yes he is.
Most GS titles
1. Roger Federer 17*
2. Pete Sampras 14
3. Björn Borg 11
= Rafael Nadal 11*
5. Jimmy Connors 8
= Ivan Lendl 8
= Andre Agassi 8
8. John McEnroe 7
= Mats Wilander 7
10. Stefan Edberg 6
= Boris Becker 6
GS finals
1. Roger Federer 24*
2. Ivan Lendl 19
3. Pete Sampras 18
4. Björn Borg 16
= Rafael Nadal 16*
6. Jimmy Connors 15
= Andre Agassi 15
8. John McEnroe 11
= Mats Wilander 11
= Stefan Edberg 11
Consecutive GS finals
1. Roger Federer 10
2. Roger Federer 8
3. Rafael Nadal 5
4. Andre Agassi 4
= Rod Laver 4
= Novak Djokovic 4
7. Jimmy Connors 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= John McEnroe 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= Mats Wilander 3
= Jim Courier 3
= Jim Courier 3
= Pete Sampras 3
= Rafael Nadal 3
GS semi-finals
1. Roger Federer 32*
2. Jimmy Connors 31
3. Ivan Lendl 28
4. Andre Agassi 26
5. Pete Sampras 23
6. John McEnroe 19
= Stefan Edberg 19
8. Boris Becker 18
9. Björn Borg 17
= Rafael Nadal 16*
Consecutive GS semi-finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Ivan Lendl 10
3. Novak Djokovic 9*
4. Ivan Lendl 6
= Nadal 6
6. Novak Djokovic 5
= Boris Becker 5
8. Roger Federer 4*
= Rod Laver 4
= Tony Roche 4
= John McEnroe 4
= Andre Agassi 4
= Jim Courer 4
= Nadal 4
= Andy Murray 4
GS quarter-finals
1. Jimmy Connors 41
2. Roger Federer 37*
3. Agassi 36
4. Ivan Lendl 34
5. Pete Sampras 29
6. John McEnroe 26
= Stefan Edberg 26
8. Boris Becker 23
= Rafael Nadal 23*
10. Björn Borg 21
= Novak Djokovic 21*
Consecutive GS quarter-finals
1. Roger Federer 33*
2. Ivan Lendl 14
3. Novak Djokovic 13*
4. Rafael Nadal 11
5. Pete Sampras 10
6. Ivan Lendl 7
= Mats Wilander 7
= Andy Murray 7
9. Andre Agassi 6
= Rafael Nadal 6
All Four Slams Per Year
Rod Laver 1969
Three Slams Per Year
Jimmy Connors 1974
Mats Wilander 1988
Roger Federer 2004
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Rafael Nadal 2010
Novak Djokovic 2011
All Four Finals Per Year
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2009
Rod Laver 1969
All Four Semi-finals Per Year
Rod Laver 1969
Ivan Lendl 1987
Roger Federer 2005
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2008
Roger Federer 2009
Rafael Nadal 2008
Novak Djokovic 2011
Andy Murray 2011
Most consecutive matches won at one Grand Slam event:
1. Björn Borg (Wimbledon), 41
2. Roger Federer (Wimbledon), 40
= Roger Federer (US Open), 40
4. Pete Sampras (Wimbledon), 31
= Rafael Nadal (French Open), 31
Most consecutive Slams played:
1. Wayne Ferreira 56
2. Stefan Edberg 54
3. Roger Federer 51*
4. Fabrice Santoro 46
5. Dominik Hrbatý 44
6. Feliciano Lopez 42*
7. Tommy Robredo 41
8. David Ferrer 39*
9. Mark Woodforde 37
=. Jonas Björkman 37
Most Grand Slam match wins
2. Roger Federer 244*
2. Jimmy Connors 233
3. Andre Agassi 224
4. Ivan Lendl 222
5. Pete Sampras 204
Other Stuff:
Year-End Championships
1. Roger Federer 6*
2. Ivan Lendl 5
= Pete Sampras 5
4. Ilie Nastase 3
= John McEnroe 3
= Boris Becker 3
Most Weeks at #1
1. Roger Federer 287+*
2. Pete Sampras 286
3. Ivan Lendl 270
4. Jimmy Connors 268
5. John McEnroe 170
6. Björn Borg 109
7. Rafael Nadal 102*
8. Andre Agassi 101
9. Lleyton Hewitt 80
10. Stefan Edberg 72
Consecutive Weeks at #1
1. Roger Federer (1) 237
2. Jimmy Connors (1) 160
3. Ivan Lendl (1) 157
4. Pete Sampras (1) 102
5. Jimmy Connors (2) 84
6. Pete Sampras (2) 82
7. Ivan Lendl (2) 80
8. Lleyton Hewitt (1) 75
9. John McEnroe (1) 58
10. Rafael Nadal (1) 56
Year End #1
1. Sampras 6
2. Federer 5*
3. Borg 4
4. Connors 3
= Lendl 3
= McEnroe 3
Highest Season Winning Percentage
1. John McEnroe (1984) .965 82–3
2. Jimmy Connors (1974) .959 93–4
3. Roger Federer (2005) .953 81–4
4. Roger Federer (2006) .948 92–5
5. Björn Borg (1979) .933 84–6
6. Ivan Lendl (1986) .925 74–6
7. Roger Federer (2004) .925 74–6
8. Ivan Lendl (1985) .923 84–7
9. Ivan Lendl (1982) .922 106–9
10. Björn Borg (1980) .921 70–6
= Novak Djokovic (2011) 0.921 70-6
Most ATP Titles
1. Jimmy Connors 109
2. Ivan Lendl 94
3. John McEnroe 77
4. Roger Federer 75*
5. Björn Borg 64
= Pete Sampras 64
7. Guillermo Vilas 62
8. Andre Agassi 60
9. Sampras 6
= Rafael Nadal 50*
10. Boris Becker 49
Consecutive Match Win Streak
1. Björn Borg 49 1978
2. Björn Borg 48 1979–80
3. Guillermo Vilas 46 1977
4. Ivan Lendl 44 1981–82
5. Novak Djokovic 43 2010–11
6. John McEnroe 42 1984
7. Roger Federer 41 2006–07
8. Thomas Muster 35 1995
= Roger Federer 35 2005
10.Jimmy Connors 33 1974
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
My point is that you are not considering the environment when you make those lists.
The field was far more competitive when the surfaces were more disparate. Fed's first 7 slam titles read like a "Who's Not" of Tennis history. Baghdatis? Roddick? Weak era.
The fact that RaNad/RoFed H2H outside clay is so balanced leaves no questions either. People marvel at the S/V abilities of Federer without a good reason to do so. Real S/V players died as a breed long time ago, as Tilden had predicted.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
That's true. He had some high and lows in his career but the achievement I mentioned is quite impressive to put him at least in the second tier (maybe not in the first one).
Which was Agassi's winning % in 1995?? He went the whole summer unbeaten until the USO final that year (26-0).
That's not true. Tennis like all sports progress/evolves...players gets better, faster and stronger overtime. Fed is competing against the field that has the most talent and depth than any past generation. Listen to all the great one like Laver, Lendl or Agassi and they will tell you that today's tennis are competing at the highest level.
H2H against one player on clay means nothing...it's the career achievements is the be-all and end-all. And besides, Nadal is a the clay goat while Fed is the 2nd best clay courter behind him in this generation.
WhiskeyEE
G.O.A.T.
89%. Close, but he also only won 1 major that year.
TennisBatman
Semi-Pro
Judging by strength of their game, rather than accomplishments:
1) Djokovic
2) Nadal
3) Federer
4) Sampras
5) Agassi
6) Laver
7) McEnroe
8) Borg
9) Connors
10) Lendl
1) Djokovic
2) Nadal
3) Federer
4) Sampras
5) Agassi
6) Laver
7) McEnroe
8) Borg
9) Connors
10) Lendl
World Beater
Hall of Fame
some of these lists have agassi but no lendl.
LOL.
cant be serious lists.
LOL.
cant be serious lists.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
If you're judging only the strength of their game and not achievements, Safin can't be outside the TOP 3. Nalbandian maybe also should be in the TOP 10.
And I love Novak, but he is not the N°1. At least for the moment. And I doubt he will ever be.
borg number one
Legend
I think that one can make a very good argument for any one player from among a group of 4-6 players especially, including Gonzalez, Rosewall, Laver, Borg, Sampras, and Federer as of now. Yet, Nadal is getting close in my opinion. Each has certain weaknesses and strengths. When identifying "objective" factors, such as "weeks at #1" and "number of majors", you have differences in terms of ranking systems, the hierarchy of tournaments, prize money distribution among tournaments, and the priorities of the players during various tennis eras. Pancho Gonzalez is a good illustration of this. Therefore, you have both "objective" and subjective factors which will necessarily depend on one's own experiences, priorities, tennis experience/knowledge, etc. Bjorn Borg has many numbers that surpass Nadal, even though he played his last major at the age of 25, having won the French Open and the Masters Cup in Jan. 1981. In 1982, he was basically unplayable on clay at practice before the French Open said Wilander. Borg contemplated a return in 1982, but not if that meant qualifying at Wimbledon or the French Open and that fight with the Tour organizers. He was burned out and decided to leave and I think that later in life, he had doubts about that decision. Vitas G. was quoted as saying the Borg deserved his big endorsements, because he had worked so hard from a young age. Yet, even by 25, just look at his match totals, schedules, and accomplishments through the age of 25 and he won at a dizzying clip. He won about 90% of his matches at majors during his career. He was very good early and played a ton. He and Connors were largely responsible for taking great tennis around the world, at a time when tennis was extremely popular and closely followed as a sport by the public. Look at the 1980 Wimbledon ratings. It was a Golden Era. Borg won 63 "official" ATP titles as of now (these numbers get revised), which is well ahead of Nadal and he made 3 finals, while playing in 4 hard court majors, on fast hard courts. Borg would have loved to play on slow hard courts too, like at the hot AO. Who would you favor on that surface? As for Rafael Nadal, Federer and Djokovic, I tend to believe that Nadal has some good things in front of him. I also think that Federer can win yet another major. We'll see with Djokovic this year and next. The U.S. Open will likely be a battle, with Murray, Tsonga and Berdych in the mix as well. We've had three winners at the majors this year and all three of these guys are playing really well overall. It's a strong trio at the top, which is nice to see. It reminds me of a time, when we had three giants competing at the top of the rankings.
Last edited:
What does "strength of their game" even mean? If Djokovic has such a strong game, why is he so inferior in accomplishments to Federer and Nadal? Are you saying that peak level is all that matters, or some root-mean-square and average of all strokes considered or something like that? 'cause Djokovic has a bad serve compared to Fed/Sampras and bad overhead and slice shots compared to almost any top player.
shaysrebelII
Professional
No right answer of course, but I'd like to try. Best of the last 100 years:
1) Roger Federer
2) Rod Laver
3) Bill Tilden
4) Pancho Gonzalez
5) Pete Sampras
6) Rafael Nadal
7) Bjorn Borg
8) Ken Rosewall
9) Don Budge
10) Jimmy Connors
1) Roger Federer
2) Rod Laver
3) Bill Tilden
4) Pancho Gonzalez
5) Pete Sampras
6) Rafael Nadal
7) Bjorn Borg
8) Ken Rosewall
9) Don Budge
10) Jimmy Connors
bullslayer
New User
1. ********
2. pete
3. borg
4. agassi
5. mcenroe
...
100.rosol
101. nadal
2. pete
3. borg
4. agassi
5. mcenroe
...
100.rosol
101. nadal
TennisBatman
Semi-Pro
1) Best 1 year of their career applies (not necessarily consecutive...partial years are also OK). For example, for Djokovic, we can count 3/4 of 2011, and 1/4 of 2008.
2) Wins against stronger opponents count more, as well as wins occuring at a major
Djokovic and Nadal are ranked higher than Federer due to the strength of the opponents they defeated in their 'best 1 year'.
Last edited:
ivan_the_terrible
Hall of Fame
This!
Lendl's numbers match or outperform Agassi, but unfortunately the former hailed from the eastern bloc.
10jingoisms
The-Champ
Legend
YouCantBeSerious
Banned
Laver behind Borg, Sampras, and Fed? LOL.
Badger
Semi-Pro
Yes (LOL) 10lols
You can argue for Borg and Sampras, but not for Fed. After 2009 FO, Fed won his 14 + career slam is consider in the same top tier as Laver, but as of now, Fed have added so much more to his resume so it's no secret that he's ahead of Laver.
helloworld
Hall of Fame
how about Federer who would've won 2 consecutive CYGS and 24+ slams if Nadal wasn't playing alongside him? we can play hypothetical "what-if"s till the cows come home.
That's quite hyperbolic. He would likely have a higher slam count, but it's all too hypothetical. Pro slams are not equivalent to open slams.
Laver probably would not have won any of the six slams he won before he turned pro if the tour had been open the entire time. He first had a claim to being the best player in the world in 1964, but that was closely contested by Rosewall. Also, Rosewall was amazing on clay and likely would have stood in Laver's way at the French for most of his career. It's not inconceivable that his '69 French Open would be his only title at Roland Garros if tennis had been open his entire career.
He probably would have won anywhere from one to three slams in the years '64 through '67 (and maybe also would have won the 1968 Australian). Even three per year would 'only' give him 17. Then again, if tennis had been open all that time, all the problems of competing tours that people faced in the early 70s would be null, and Laver would have participated in more slams in '70 and '71, when he was still a top player, so he may have bagged a few more as well.
That's just my opinion on this entirely hypothetical situation.
kiki
Banned
One of the facts many people forget is that, in his best ever year, Mac just conceded 3 defeats: 2 of them to world´s nº 2 and 3 (Lendl and Wilander) and the other one ...to Vijay, that is a great tribute to the best ever indian tennis player´s talent.
kiki
Banned
Clueless.Borg won 3 majors indoors, Masters ( 79 and 80) and Dallas ( 76) while Nadal has never done anything worthy indoors.Borg never won hard courts (USO) and Nadal never won indoors (current YEC)
Similar threads
