Arguments from Fed, Nadal, and DJokovic camps

[drm025]

We see a lot of threads with all the same arguments being rehashed over and over again, correct? Wouldn't it be great to have a thread for reference where we list all of these arguments that come from each fan base? That way we don't have to have all these long arguments that go in circles right?

I'll try to list the arguments I have seen and you guys can comment about if I am off. I can continue to update this first post and even include which arguments have been confirmed by the appropriate fan base. Should we give it a try?

Fed Fans

-Federer is the most consistent and successful grand slam player in tennis history
-He is the most versatile player and has the best surface distribution of slam wins in history
-He is the greatest sportsman in tennis, evidenced by his numerous sportsman of the year awards
-The lack of other all-time greats at their peak during 04-07 was made up for by the fact that the field was much deeper talent-wise and lots of players were able to step up
-His losing H2H against Nadal isn't really a negative, because it shows that he made so many extra finals and there is no shame in losing to the clay GOAT at RG
-He has had a major disadvantage being 5 years older than Nadal and 6 years older than Djokovic, and he would always be expected to be losing in the overall H2H (Djokovic and Nadal had the advantage of having no good younger players chasing them)
-He deserves major credit for making 60 consecutive grand slam appearance, he is always there and in contention
-Everything he achieves from here on out is icing on the cake
-He leads Nadal at 4/5 of the biggest 5 tournaments, so Nadal isn't really even close to him at this point
-He should be admired for always following the rules in any circumstance
-Having two sets of twins adds to his GOAT-hood

Nadal Fans

-Has been unfortunate with injuries his entire career (limiting both his weeks at number 1 and his slam count)
-Leads H2H with all of his major rivals (even more significant lead in slams), so he is the most dominant player of this era (Davydenko H2H is insignificant)
-He is much more than a clay specialist due to his numerous achievements elsewhere
-When fully fit, he is the hardest player to beat
-Doesn't need to win WTFs to surpass Federer
-Federer can't be GOAT when he was owned in the H2H by his main rival
-Nadal's pace of play has no significant bearing on the outcome of a tennis match
-Attacking Nadal for his rituals between points is a pretty low blow (so is accusing him of steroid-use)


Djokovic Fans

-Djokovic has been the most disadvantaged player of the 3, due to entering his prime with both Nadal and Federer around
-His 2011 season showcased the best 9-month period in the open era, dominating the top competition and 2 all-time greats
-He is just as consistent and versatile as Federer
-He has been extremely unlucky not to win RG at this point in his career


This is what I have so far, starting to blank. Please suggest arguments that should be added for your favorite player, and please confirm or deny the arguments that I have included for your favorite.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

- Nadal is the most dominant player on a single surface by far, winning 9 RG in a span of a decade, winning multiple times Rome, MC, Madrid and Barcelona.
-Besides his amazing achievements in clay, which alone would put them among the very best ever (top 5 from the open era a) his resume includes 2 wimbledon (1 beating wimbledon goat on his prime), 2 US0 and 1 RG, And this include 11 Non-Clay slam finals (3+ finals in every slam 3,9,5,3).
-Nadal has amazing achievements and is 5 years younger than Federer.
-Nadal didnt have the luck to win tons of slams in transitional era, and he had the misfortune to face peak djokovic when Federer was already declining.
-Nadal is the only player to have won both the HC North american swing (Cinci, Canada, USO) and the CLay swin, (Rome, MC, Madrid and Rg).
-Nadal is the younger to win Calendar slam, he also has the golden slam.
-Rafa has 27 m1000, more than any other player in history.

 

[tennisaddict]

Federer has been consistently rated as the greatest of all time by former greats, fellow players, experts and media and is the most love player in the history of the game.

Federer, without Nadal, would be sitting close to 25 majors.

 

[Bobby Jr]

Nadal's biggest consecutive achievement, winning 5 French Opens in a row is amazing.

Federer achieved it at Wimbledon and the US Open - and pretty much concurrently too.

Federer's single season focus and dominance across multiple seasons beats Nadal's best season by some margin. This is one of the most common key, understated different between them imo.

 

[Day Tripper]

- Federer jointly holds the slam records at three of the four slams.
- He has spent over twice as many weeks at number 1 than Nadal.

 

[tennisaddict]

Federer winning 4 at 3 of the 4 majors and reaching 5+ finals at all the 4 majors beats every conceivable record in ATP history.

Nadal's 9 FO wins is something beyond comprehension and he will remain as the best player ever to dominate a single surface.

 

[eldanger25]

Djokovic went 12-1 against Federer and Nadal in 2011, taking a sledgehammer to probably the most impressive rivalry in Open Era history.

Nadal lost twice in 12 months to Federer between 2006-07 at GS events, all on one surface, and has won all their other nine GS encounters, including victories on all three surfaces, each year from 2005-09, 2011-12, and in 2014.

Nadal also lost three times in 7 months to Djokovic between 2011-12 at GS events, on two surfaces, and has won all their other nine GS encounters, among them victories on all three GS surfaces, each year from 2006-08, 2010, and 2012-14.

Federer has all those amazing records, and has won nearly everything one could want to win in a tennis career, bar Davis Cup (which he has a chance to rectify this year), the Olympic singles gold medal (which he has a chance to rectify at Rio 2016), and the great traditional slow red clay events at Monte Carlo/Rome (which he's made multiple finals at).

Federer has also defended more big titles than anybody else in Open Era history - often over and over again.

 

[Aretium]

For me.
Rafa is the greatest defensive shotmaker of all time.
Fed is the greatest offensive shotmaker and one of the best defensive shotmakers ever.
Both guys are also consistent, producing regular astonishing shotmaking in almost every match they play.

I actually see Nadal as a better shotmaker than Novak. Djokovic has amazing point construction and a perfect balance of attack and defence for the modern game.

As a spectator, the Federer's shotmaking will always be the reason I like to watch him. I'm lucky to have grown up watching Fed/Safin/Nalbandian/Rafa/Djok.
I try not to support players because sometimes I don't appreciate the tennis played if I'm pulling for a player.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Fed Fans

-Federer is the most consistent and successful grand slam player in tennis history. Agreed.
-He is the most versatile player and has the best surface distribution of slam wins in history. Agreed. Although Nadal is not far behind.
-He is the greatest sportsman in tennis, evidenced by his numerous sportsman of the year awards. Agreed.
-The lack of other all-time greats at their peak during 04-07 was made up for by the fact that the field was much deeper talent-wise and lots of players were able to step up. Disagree. The "lack of all time greats" was due to Federer dominating so much, so if Federer was weaker Hewitt, Roddick and Safin would probably be 3-5 time slam winners, therefore all time greats..
-His losing H2H against Nadal isn't really a negative, because it shows that he made so many extra finals and there is no shame in losing to the clay GOAT at RG. Agreed.
-He has had a major disadvantage being 5 years older than Nadal and 6 years older than Djokovic, and he would always be expected to be losing in the overall H2H (Djokovic and Nadal had the advantage of having no good younger players chasing them) - Disagreed. Federer still leads the H2H with Djokovic to date.. and for a good while people didn't expect him to be behind in the H2H with him upon retirement.. it is a strong possibility now however.
-He deserves major credit for making 60 consecutive grand slam appearance, he is always there and in contention. Agreed.
-Everything he achieves from here on out is icing on the cake. Agreed.
-He leads Nadal at 4/5 of the biggest 5 tournaments, so Nadal isn't really even close to him at this point. Disagree. Nadal is on 14 slams and in reality is only 3 behind Federer, and despite surface distribution, ect, people will remember how much he won, not where he did it at the most.
-He should be admired for always following the rules in any circumstance. Agreed, but he doesn't stand alone here.
-Having two sets of twins adds to his GOAT-hood. What? I don't understand how him having two sets of twins makes the man the GOAT..

Nadal Fans

-Has been unfortunate with injuries his entire career (limiting both his weeks at number 1 and his slam count). Agreed to a point. Injuries are apart of the game and if nobody was injured in tennis (all time greats in a sense) Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, ect would be much more successful than they are.
-Leads H2H with all of his major rivals (even more significant lead in slams), so he is the most dominant player of this era (Davydenko H2H is insignificant). Agreed.
-He is much more than a clay specialist due to his numerous achievements elsewhere. Agreed.
-When fully fit, he is the hardest player to beat. Agreed to a point, I would say he's the hardest to beat on clay, but everywhere I don't think so.
-Doesn't need to win WTFs to surpass Federer. Disagree. The man probably needs at least 17 slams and 1 WTF to fully surpass Federer.
-Federer can't be GOAT when he was owned in the H2H by his main rival. Disagreed. Sampras was more lucky than Federer (he didn't get to face Nadal during his prime, past his prime or whatever) and if he got to face him he'd be dominated by the man too.
-Nadal's pace of play has no significant bearing on the outcome of a tennis match. I don't understand what you're trying to say here.
-Attacking Nadal for his rituals between points is a pretty low blow (so is accusing him of steroid-use) - I've never done that and I don't think it's relevant in this discussion. I don't think Nadal has taken steroids either.


Djokovic Fans

-Djokovic has been the most disadvantaged player of the 3, due to entering his prime with both Nadal and Federer around. Disagreed. Nadal and Federer weren't at their best when Djokovic hit his 2011 form.
-His 2011 season showcased the best 9-month period in the open era, dominating the top competition and 2 all-time greats. Disagreed. McEnroe showed more dominance during his 1984 season.
-He is just as consistent and versatile as Federer. Disagreed. Federer wouldn't have lost to players like Nishikori or Wawrinka in his prime.
-He has been extremely unlucky not to win RG at this point in his career. Disagreed. If he couldn't beat past his prime Nadal at Roland Garros in 2013, he probably wouldn't beat any Nadal apart from the 2011 version.

 

[Bryan Swartz]

OP makes a noble effort here but ignores a few points. Aside from the oft-mentioned fundamentally illogical nature of the GOAT debate itself, we must also not assume more of the community that it can bear. Some here have difficulty finding a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight. Those who can put a cogent argument together are usually not mature enough to do so in a reasonable manner.

While this is a good idea, it is doomed to float into obscurity like all other like-minded noble efforts.

 

[Gary Duane]

Fed Fans

-Having two sets of twins adds to his GOAT-hood. What? I don't understand how him having two sets of twins makes the man the GOAT..

I suspect there was a bit of humor there.

Those of us who are parents and grandparents marvel that the man travels with the whole group and still smiles.

This has nothing to do with tennis really, but when you have kids, you say goodbye to privacy, sleep and peace.

I heard Evert joking with Fed about "who changes the nappies".

I think Fed is mostly a good good man.

I would argue that ALL of the top players are good men.

Think back to Conners, who was fun to watch but was, frankly, not a very nice person.

Think of McEnroe, who in his time was the biggest brat we have ever seen. (I rather like McEnroe now - he has grown up).

Both these guys represented tennis for awhile. Then we had Borg, quiet and polite, who stopped playing at 26.

I think Federer, Nadal and Joker represent themselves very well, and also tennis. Murray is more emotional, more vulnerable, but I judge him to be a good man also.

I think people in this forum REALLY need to get a sense of humor. Believe me, children will do that for you. You either learn how to laugh, or you kill yourself!

 

[Gary Duane]

OP makes a noble effort here but ignores a few points. Aside from the oft-mentioned fundamentally illogical nature of the GOAT debate itself,

I agree that that it is illogical, much more fantasy...

we must also not assume more of the community that it can bear.

Some here have difficulty finding a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight.

That is about grammar, and sentence construction...

Those who can put a cogent argument together are usually not mature enough to do so in a reasonable manner.

There are many immature people who can put together a cogent argument. That is more about linguistic virtuosity than maturity...

 

[ThomasGB]

What about the Murray camp?

-British, or Scottish?

Lol.