Search results

Federer and Nadal (just) remain greater than him in my opinion. (Not in terms of #1 stats, but writing "the greatest #1" basically means the same thing as "greatest player to be ranked #1" in my mind - although I don't think that's what Nole Slam meant as such)

A man with a 100-2 record at a certain tournament just has to win it once more.

The GOAT of the game returns. Things are looking up. (y)

He'll have spent the longest at #1, if that's what you mean.

He can, but shall he? That is the million dollar question.

Yes, I thought the poll question had effectively already been answered. Radwanska did have some fine achievements which Swiatek is yet to match, of course - No 2 ranking and a YEC title.

Osaka, Swiatek and Barty shall the closest thing to the Big 3 on the WTA. So be it.

I agree with this whole post except the last sentence's swipe at Sampras. But then, I understand why you did it - sad that Pete appears to be most vociferously represented on this forum by a Fed-hating troll.

Probably not. But then that's what happens when you're facing the GOAT of the game at his peak.

Nadal was already a three-time slam champ and double Wimbledon finalist then. Sure he wasn't at peak, but he was still Nadal - always irritating when people try to claim Nadal was some kind of semi-mug at this point. P.S. Nadal and Novak Djokovic are way past their peaks now, and the youngsters...

Yes, but he beat them a combined total of 5 times in 2 Masters tourneys. None of the Next Gen have done that. Of course, he was just an also ran in Fed’s strong generation, whereas these guys are supposedly the cream of the crop in the current one. :whistle: Also, “Nadalbandian” = nice typo btw.

I’m a Sampras fan, just like you.

He’s a failed poster.

"easily" ? He's about to turn 35. As great as Nadal is, that's a pretty poor indictment of the sport if you think he'll smash past that target at this point.

Doubt it. Also, he's by no means unbeatable in New York.

I thought this was going to be an unnecessary boasting thread, but I get what you mean, OP.

So? They were still the top 3 (Djokovic was the recent USO finalist, and Nadal had been No 2 for about 2.5 years).

Nice thread, OP. Here are the No 1 singles on the UK chart when PETE won his slams: 1990 US: Itsy Bitsy Teeny Weeny Yellow Polka Dot Bikini by Bombalurina 1993 W: Dreams by Gabrielle 1993 US: Mr Vain by Culture Beat 1994 AO: Things Can Only Get Better...

Did they beat the big 3 in successive matches, having beaten them 2 of them in another recent tournament? Thought not.

PETE with consummate ease.

Honestly, if we met CYGS in real life, everyone here would own him in logic so easily.

Well done, Andy.

Incorrect analysis. Peak Federer would have beaten Murray in the USO final in 2012 and at W in 2013, plus Stan at the AO in 2014 and Nishikori at the USO that year. Face facts, peak Federer > peak Novak Djokovic.

The @Nole Slam is given so little credit because he is often mentioned in the same sentence as The Spencer. And no man (or woman) can come off well in that comparison.

Nope. He pretty much doesn't care about the No 1 ranking now that he's broken Fed's record.

Can you imagine Medvedev, Zverev or Tsistipas doing to the Big 3 what Nalbandian did to them in 2007?

Court won almost half her slams in depleted fields at the AO. Of course, she's still a great of the game, since she won the CYGS in 1970 and 13 slams outside the AO. But she cannot quite compare to the pure Open Era legends like Serena, Steffi, Martina and Chris.

To the age of 25, Borg was the equal of Nadal at RG. Please consider his stats. Overall, Nadal is of course greater there.

You mean when Rafa and Nole retire aged 40?

Djokodal's generation > Fed's generation > Next Gen > Lost Gen Novak Djokovic has benefitted from winning most slams against the latter two generations. :whistle: