At What Point Does Rafa Surpass Roger in a GOAT Discussion?

[BigServer1]

Asking this question seriously...

If Rafa wins tomorrow night, and has 11 slams, he'll be tied with Laver and Borg for overall number, and will have multiple slam wins at 3/4 slams.

Here's my take: If Rafa can win another Australian Open and another US Open, he'll be right there with Roger in the mix. This is assuming he can win another FO or two of course. That would give him 13-14 slams, at least 2 victories at each slam, absolute dominance at one (FO), the Masters shield record, an Olympic gold medal and multiple Davis Cup victories. He'd need to pick up a YEC title too, maybe...You'd also have to consider that he's owned his primary rival and doesn't have a losing record against any pro that matters (Davydenko doesn't matter in the grand scheme of tennis history).

While after last year I thought Rafa would have a really hard time getting to that number, now I feel like it's definitely possible. While he'd need a good draw to win the US Open, his current HC form is showing that he's still formidable on the surface.

This year should be really interesting. Can Djokovic keep it up? Can Rafa win multiple slams again? Does Fed have one left in him? Should be entertaining at least.

Any other thoughts on if/when Rafa could climb into the top 2-3 of all time discussion and what he needs to do to get there?

 

[NadalAgassi]

If he reaches 16 slams he is definitely over Federer (if Federer is still at 16). Perhaps if he reaches 14-15 but has atleast 2 Australian and 2 U.S Opens that would also do it. If their achievements are at all close the H2H dominance will swing it in Nadal's favor in virtually everyones eyes.

 

[celoft]

 

[tennismonkey]

when he has more grand slams than the record holder. think his name is roger something. you're jumping the gun son. lots of tennis left to be played.

 

[CDestroyer]

If he were to win more majors than Federer. Which will never happen.

This thread sucks.

 

[hawk eye]

Not more, the same amount will do giving the H2H.

Adding to my own post here: he then surpass Federer for sure on the list for most people.

But fed's no Goat either. Just can't be with such a losing H2H to his rival.

Amount of slams is not the only measure stick.

 

[ivan_the_terrible]

When the definition of GOAT has been changed to mean:

- An extreme grinder that can pull winners from 10ft behind the baseline using an extremely unnaturally generated amount of topspin.

- A player that has never defended a non-clay court GS title

- A player that gets illegal coaching

- A player that is a serial time-waster between points

- A player that is a serial MTO abuser

There's more, but I only have so much time on my hands today...

 

[Winner_DownTheLine]

never for me, he is just a transitional #1

 

[TMF]

when he has more grand slams than the record holder. think his name is roger something. you're jumping the gun son. lots of tennis left to be played.

And he has to catch Sampras first before even thinking about Federer.

A lot more tennis to play means he also have to add # of weeks at #1, at least win one WTF, more titles, etc...

 

[NadalAgassi]

When the definition of GOAT

Roger isnt the GOAT so the thread topic has nothing to do with that. Surpassing Roger does not automatically make one the GOAT, it just one step on the way there.

 

[Warmaster]

Before we start discussing this, let's wait if he can actually win on sunday. Because if he doesn't, the gap between Djokovic and Nadal will already be smaller than the gap between Nadal and Federer and then Djokovic catching up on Nadal will look more likely than Nadal catching up with Federer.

 

[namelessone]

Oh brother, sometimes I get the feeling that some people hold up Rafa as GOAT in artificial way just so we can discuss the subject yet again.

Look, Rafa is 6 slams short of the GS record, has many weeks to go to beat Sampras's nr.1 record, has won no year end championships and so on.

So why do some insists on penciling him in as a GOAT candidate?

 

[Tennis_Hands]

@ OP

GOAT is in your mind, boy.

/thread

 

[TMF]

Oh brother, sometimes I get the feeling that some people hold up Rafa as GOAT in artificial way just so we can discuss the subject yet again.

Look, Rafa is 6 slams short of the GS record, has many weeks to go to beat Sampras's nr.1 record, has won no year end championships and so on.

So why do some insists on penciling him in as a GOAT candidate?

Putting pressure on Nadal and his fans ?

 

[double barrels]

And he has to catch Sampras first before even thinking about Federer.

A lot more tennis to play means he also have to add # of weeks at #1, at least win one WTF, more titles, etc...

yea...nadal isn't close to sampras yet
even if nadal gets 14 GS, theyll probably just be on the dirt, don't see him taking any other GS

i dont ever see nadal as a top 3

 

[dudeski]

17 slams, 6 years at #1, 7 WTFs. That's all.

 

[Magnus]

If he were to win more majors than Federer. Which will never happen.

This thread sucks.

Its already happening. The countdown has begun.

 

[NikeWilson]

Stemming back to 2010, Rafa made the Finals of the French, Wimbledon, and US Open.
In 2011, he didn't make it to the Australian Open Final, but made it to the French, Wimbledon, and US Open Finals.
In 2012, he's made it to the Australian Open Final.
Since 2010, Rafa's made 7 Grand Slam Finals.

In 2010, Djokovic made it to the US Open Final.
In 2011, Djokovic made it to the Australian Open, Wimbledon, and US Open Final.
In 2012, he made it to the Australian Open Final.
That's 5 Finals since 2010.

In 2010, Federer made it to the Australian Open Final.
In 2011, Federer made it to the French Open Final.
That's only 2 Finals since 2010.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Laver says theres no goat, only a best of each era and both are the best of their era as Fed has more slams(both 10 after 31 attempts) and wtf, but Nadal has the Gold and 4 Davis cups, more MS titles and dominates Fed in slam finals.

 

[heftylefty]

When Nadal reaches 17 Slams, lets talk.

 

[BigServer1]

I'm not implying he's GOAT, or anywhere near it. I'm simply asking when is he entering the same air as Fed?

Some people have Laver and/or Borg ahead of Fed, some think Sampras is best, others think Fed is head and shoulders better. I'm just curious what Rafa would need to do to get some of that consideration.

My point is simply that if Rafa wins 3-4 more slams, amasses more time at #1 and continues to win Masters titles, he'll have a resume that at least needs to be inserted into a conversation, given the fact that he absolutely owns his chief rival.

I'm a huge Fed fan, but I feel like his h2h with Rafa will start to weigh more heavily on people's minds if Rafa catches up a bit in overall slam number.

Keep in mind when Fed won GS #16, Rafa was sitting at 6. He's already closed the gap by 4 slams in 2 years.

 

[Rozroz]

LOL
made my day.

 

[marcub]

It depends on who you're asking. For many fanboys Ralph is already ahead of Fed, regardless of Slam count.

Believe it or not, the answer really depends on Djoker, Delpo, Tomic, Raonic and the likes, as they are the ones who will stop Ralph from catching up with Fed.

 

[Gangsta]

Believe it or not, the answer really depends on Djoker, Delpo, Tomic, Raonic and the likes, as they are the ones who will stop Ralph from catching up with Fed.

I think the answer depends on only one man. And that is Federer himself. If Federer can push the gap wider by a couple of slams, that will be good enough to leave him all by himself I think. I don't see more than 4 slams in Rafa. But again, if anyone has proved people wrong time and time again, it is Nadal. There does not seem to be a limit to what he can will his body and mind to achieve.

 

[purge]

to me.. the moment he plays better tennis that federer

 

[jukka1970]

Asking this question seriously...

If Rafa wins tomorrow night, and has 11 slams, he'll be tied with Laver and Borg for overall number, and will have multiple slam wins at 3/4 slams.

Here's my take: If Rafa can win another Australian Open and another US Open, he'll be right there with Roger in the mix. This is assuming he can win another FO or two of course. That would give him 13-14 slams, at least 2 victories at each slam, absolute dominance at one (FO), the Masters shield record, an Olympic gold medal and multiple Davis Cup victories. He'd need to pick up a YEC title too, maybe...You'd also have to consider that he's owned his primary rival and doesn't have a losing record against any pro that matters (Davydenko doesn't matter in the grand scheme of tennis history).

While after last year I thought Rafa would have a really hard time getting to that number, now I feel like it's definitely possible. While he'd need a good draw to win the US Open, his current HC form is showing that he's still formidable on the surface.

This year should be really interesting. Can Djokovic keep it up? Can Rafa win multiple slams again? Does Fed have one left in him? Should be entertaining at least.

Any other thoughts on if/when Rafa could climb into the top 2-3 of all time discussion and what he needs to do to get there?

I don't think Nadal will ever fall into the goat category.

To be considered GOAT, it's more then just number of slams and h2h. Nadal is not consistent enough in my book to make this category. 10 straight slam finals, and then 8 straight slam finals for Federer, the next best is 4 is just one of the many important records. And speaking of h2h, Novak is only 3 behind Nadal. If Novak takes this australian open, that'll be 7 times in a row that Novak has beaten on Nadal, on different surfaces. So if Novak passes Nadal in the h2h department, does that keep Nadal off the possible GOAT list, I would say no.

 

[marcub]

I think the answer depends on only one man. And that is Federer himself. If Federer can push the gap wider by a couple of slams, that will be good enough to leave him all by himself I think. I don't see more than 4 slams in Rafa. But again, if anyone has proved people wrong time and time again, it is Nadal. There does not seem to be a limit to what he can will his body and mind to achieve.

Fed can sure win a couple of more slams (with the help of some lucky draws), but he will also do more damage to his heritage the minute he plays Ralph outdoors again.

However. If Ralph wins this weekend be prepared for another annoying media assault about how Ralph is the greatest. That's why I'm saying it's up to Djoker, rather than Fed himself.

 

[NamRanger]

If Nadal loses tomorrow he can never be GOAT. Period. If Djokovic beats him again, he will have beaten him in a 3rd slam final in a row. If he loses to Djokovic at the FO, well, that just solidifies the argument that Nadal will never be the GOAT.

 

[namelessone]

If Nadal loses tomorrow he can never be GOAT. Period. If Djokovic beats him again, he will have beaten him in a 3rd slam final in a row. If he loses to Djokovic at the FO, well, that just solidifies the argument that Nadal will never be the GOAT.

LOL at that argument being beaten by Djokovic.

That argument is less weeks at nr.1, less slams, no year end championship and so on.

 

[OddJack]

Rafael Nadal has never been in GOAT discussion.

He has been in Federer's GOAT discussion as a question mark. That's best he has done.

Have a good day.

 

[NamRanger]

LOL at that argument being beaten by Djokovic.

That argument is less weeks at nr.1, less slams, no year end championship and so on.

Don't you like ********* logic being applied to Nadal? It's pretty fun being the bad guy for once.


Even if Nadal surpasses Federer in slam count, remember, if Novak continues this streak against Nadal (even if Novak somehow falls off but still continues to beat Nadal when he meets him), Nadal can't even be considered the best of his own era/contemporaries. As much as you want to say Nadal is "older" in tennis years, he's not. Last year if it were not for Novak Nadal takes a clean sweep of 3 slams and a truckload of Masters.

 

[NadalAgassi]

If Nadal loses tomorrow he can never be GOAT. Period. If Djokovic beats him again, he will have beaten him in a 3rd slam final in a row. If he loses to Djokovic at the FO, well, that just solidifies the argument that Nadal will never be the GOAT.

I actually agree (that is if Nadal someday ever reached GOAT numbers which he clearly hasnt yet anyway), and it is the same reason why I would never consider the Federer the GOAT either. Someone like Laver, Sampras, or perhaps Rosewall who dominated all their peers in their prime years anyway are the better choices for greatest ever.

 

[Colin]

If he reaches 16 slams he is definitely over Federer (if Federer is still at 16). Perhaps if he reaches 14-15 but has atleast 2 Australian and 2 U.S Opens that would also do it. If their achievements are at all close the H2H dominance will swing it in Nadal's favor in virtually everyones eyes.

What is your definition of "virtually everyone"? Serious tennis nuts of the sort who frequent tennis forums? Even then, can you imagine even a marginal majority of the members here believing that would be the case? The loyalties and hatreds of *******s and *******s so rarely yield, especially when a case hinges on a slam total less than 16. I think Federer fans understand that while Fed still can play some amazing tennis, at this age he can't be expected to regularly beat the top few players. A lopsided head-to-head with Nadal (and potentially Djokovic) is something that doesn't worry Roger, nor should it his fans: That inglorious footnote is the price we pay for the ability to admire his skill in his tennis golden years.

If you take "virtually everyone" to mean anyone with even a vague awareness of tennis, I think you will find Federer will always be much more popular than Nadal. And it really has little to do with numbers of titles and head-to-head wins, but something more ephemeral and ineffable. While casual fans may appreciate Rafa's determination and fighting spirit, it's Fed's ability at his peak to wave his tennis racket like a magic wand that captures a certain awe and wonder upon a random viewing on YouTube or a highlight on television.

And, finally, if you take "virtually everyone" to mean all but a few inhabitants of planet Earth, then we have to face the sad reality of slobbering soccer/football fans asking: Who are Federer and Nadal?

The vast majority of the world can't be bothered to take an interest in tennis. But if they witnessed the splendor of Federer at his best, they would.

 

[NadalAgassi]

What is your definition of "virtually everyone"? Serious tennis nuts of the sort who frequent tennis forums?

No, I mean qualified experts on the subject in the real World. This forum is nothing more than a funny farm I only come on for the humor of it all. McEnroe for instance was even mentioning Nadal as the possible GOAT during Wimbledon last year with only 10 slams (note I dont at all agree with this but it is a fact). Imagine if he had 16, or even 14 or 15 but multiple slams at each venue.

 

[hawk eye]

Side note: Borg is often mentioned in the top tier, but Nadal isn't.
Just one slam between them, and possibly after sunday it's even.
Besides that, Nadal has won all majors and Borg only 2 (Wimbledon and Rg)
For myself the slam count is overrated but even when you take the majors as the only criterium, they're about even. So al least Nadal should be up there, or Borg should relegate to tier two.

 

[Colin]

No, I mean qualified experts on the subject in the real World. This forum is nothing more than a funny farm I only come on for the humor of it all.

And by "funny farm" to you mean a mental health asylum or a barn filled with cows, chickens and donkeys (no goats, please) with a certain comedic sensibility?

I think you could make a case either way. And yes, I enjoy the passion and entertainment value here, too.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Side note: Borg is often mentioned in the top tier, but Nadal isn't.
Just one slam between them, and possibly after sunday it's even.
Besides that, Nadal has won all majors and Borg only 2 (Wimbledon and Rg)
For myself the slam count is overrated but even when you take the majors as the only criterium, they're about even. So al least Nadal should be up there, or Borg should relegate to tier two.

I already consider Nadal and Borg at about the same level. Neither has a very good GOAT argument currently though.

 

[Russeljones]

Never. Consecutive weeks as #1, end of story.

 

[Deleted member 3771]

Nadal is already ahead until Federer beats him in 5 more slam finals including finals on clay and hard courts. :wink:

 

[Kevin T]

I'm not implying he's GOAT, or anywhere near it. I'm simply asking when is he entering the same air as Fed?

Some people have Laver and/or Borg ahead of Fed, some think Sampras is best, others think Fed is head and shoulders better. I'm just curious what Rafa would need to do to get some of that consideration.

My point is simply that if Rafa wins 3-4 more slams, amasses more time at #1 and continues to win Masters titles, he'll have a resume that at least needs to be inserted into a conversation, given the fact that he absolutely owns his chief rival.

I'm a huge Fed fan, but I feel like his h2h with Rafa will start to weigh more heavily on people's minds if Rafa catches up a bit in overall slam number.

Keep in mind when Fed won GS #16, Rafa was sitting at 6. He's already closed the gap by 4 slams in 2 years.

Agree with you Big, teenie bopper fanboys be darned. Fed has all the statistics save one VERY big asterisk: a peer has a dominant head to head record against him. And we're not talking 5 or 6 matches, we're talking:

All matches: Nadal 18–9
All finals: Nadal 13–6
Grand Slam matches: Nadal 8–2
Grand Slam finals: Nadal 6–2

I'm also not saying Nad is the GOAT (I personally think Fed is) but how can the greatest of all-time have this kind of record against anyone?

 

[Raz11]

LOL even if Nadal reaches 16 slams, he would need 6 WTFs and even if he gets 6 WTFs he would need 5 year ending ranked #1. If he can accomplish those three then he can be considered the GOAT over Federer. The fact that he can never accomplish the last two means he would need more slams than Federer to even be considered. So no he won't.

The H2h is a misleading statistic with the majority of the matches played on Nadal's favourite surface (slow HC and Clay) , so it inflates Nadal's dominance over Federer. If you were to give equal distribution to all the surfaces, There wouldn't be a big gap between the two.

If they were to play exactly 30 matches on each 4 surface (Hard, Indoor Hard, Clay and Grass) their distribution would be like this.
Hard : 25 - 5
Indoor Hard : 3 - 27
Grass: 10 - 20
Clay: 25 - 5
H2H: 63 - 57

If the surfaces were more equally distributed, the H2H would be much closer.

 

[NadalAgassi]

LOL at the idea Nadal would need 6 WTFs, apparently even if he had 17 slams. The WTF compared to the Slams is nothing. 1 slam is about the value of 5 WTFs, and 2 Masters is worth more than 1 WTF as well. Davis Cup and the Olympics, neither of which Federer has won, is atleast on the same level as the WTF. I can see ****s will desperately resort to building that up as if it were Wimbledon though if that is their last resort.

 

[Raz11]

I'm also not saying Nad is the GOAT (I personally think Fed is) but how can the greatest of all-time have this kind of record against anyone?

He doesn't have to be better than everyone, since that is impossible. But Federer is the most accomplished tennis player imo and that is enough for me to call him GOAT.

 

[OddJack]

Pathetic bunch, all you have is a h2h.

There is no single tennis great who has even mentioned him in such discussion.

In couple of years Laver will need to move him up over Nadal in his list.

 

[mattennis]

There is no GOAT.

There have been several players that stood out so much in their era that we can consider them "Greatest of their time", like Pancho Gonzalez, Ken Rosewall, Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras and Roger Federer (and some others that stood out almost that much, like John Newcombe, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Ivan Lendl, Andre Agassi, Rafael Nadal,....and some others a bit behind like Mats Wilander, Stefan Edberg, Boris Becker....).

Everything has changed (playing conditions) so much that it is absurd to pretend to compare players from one decade to players from previous decades.

From this era of today, Federer is (currently) the best (of this last decade), and I don't think it will change because I don't see Nadal winning 6 more GS, ending 3 or more years at nº1, staying 190 weeks MORE in the nº1 (if he ever gets there again), winning 5 or 6 YEC, etc....

So it is almost guarantied that Federer will end as the "Greatest Player of His Time" and it remains a question if Nadal (even though not getting to Federer's achievements) can add so much as to be considered at the end in that list of Gonzalez, Rosewall, Laver, Borg, Sampras and Federer (given that I already consider him at least in the "second" list of Newcombe, Connors, McEnroe, Lendl and Agassi).

 

[Raz11]

LOL at the idea Nadal would need 6 WTFs. The WTF compared to the Slams is nothing. 1 slam is about the value of 5 WTFs, and 2 Masters is worth more than 1 WTF as well. I can see ****s will desperately resort to building that up as if it were Wimbledon though if that is their last resort.

And a H2H is nothing compared to the slams, so what. Would people rather have a losing H2H or win the WTF/ end year #1. Titles are what matters, not a collection of matches which have no purpose but to say that Nadal dominates Federer on his surfaces and Federer dominates Nadal on his.

 

[NadalAgassi]

And a H2H is nothing compared to the slams, so what. Would people rather have a losing H2H or win the WTF/ end year #1. Titles are what matters, not a collection of matches which have no purpose but to say that Nadal dominates Federer on his surfaces and Federer dominates Nadal on his.

Farcial statement. Federer doesnt dominate Nadal on any surface. They are 5-5 on hard courts, but Federer trailing 1-5 on outdoor hard courts where the slams are played, Federer is up 2-1 on grass which is hardly dominance, and Nadal up by a lanslide on clay. In slams it is 5-0 Nadal on clay, 2-0 Nadal on hards, 2-1 Federer on grass.

If my main rival were a fellow all time great and by far the other dominant player of my era I would rather win 70% of my matches with him and 80% of my slam finals/semis with him then win the WTF, that is for sure. It is like saying if Nadal keeps losing to Djokovic, and Djokovic also becomes a double digit slam winner, it isnt a major blotch on his legacy and how the two compare, would you say that, if you do then you are incredibly stupid in that respect as well.

Anyway I dont expect Nadal to reach 16 or 17 slams (or even neccessarily 14 or 15), although if he wins the final tommorow night I might change my mind on that, so it is probably moot. However if he reaches 16 or 17 slams everyone who matters will rank Nadal over Federer, that is a guarantee. If he even reaches 14 or 15 but has won multiple at each slam venue, many will as well. The WTF will be more than negated by all of Nadal's extra Masters, victories across all surfaces (moreso than Federer who has won few important titles on clay), Davis Cup and Olympic wins, and vastly overshadowed by his H2H ownage of Federer. Again in the real World, what ****s cry about on here will be meaningless, like it always has been.

 

[mattennis]

To clarify a bit my previous post:

One can think I am "comparing" players achievements from different eras when I said that depending on how much Nadal adds to his achievements I would put him in the "first list" or the "second list", but I meant depending on how he compares to Federer (who is, currently, the best from their era).

I put in the very first list players that clearly dominated an era (at least 3 or 4 or 5 years) with outstanding achievements (compared to their rivals's from their era) though sometimes it is very difficult because two players from basically the same era stood out almost equally (like Borg and Connors, then McEnroe and Lendl), so at the end it is totally a subjective thing.

Having said that, if in the next 4 or 5 years Nadal adds so much to his achievements that it is almost as good as Federer's, I would have no problem taking them both (even if they are basically from the same era) to the very first list (sometimes I even put Connors or Lendl in that very first list, because depending on what you consider, you can make a case for them).

At the end of the day, all this is just a subjective game that we like to play and there are as many GOATs lists as people like to play.

 

[Kevin T]

LOL even if Nadal reaches 16 slams, he would need 6 WTFs and even if he gets 6 WTFs he would need 5 year ending ranked #1. If he can accomplish those three then he can be considered the GOAT over Federer. The fact that he can never accomplish the last two means he would need more slams than Federer to even be considered. So no he won't.

The H2h is a misleading statistic with the majority of the matches played on Nadal's favourite surface (slow HC and Clay) , so it inflates Nadal's dominance over Federer. If you were to give equal distribution to all the surfaces, There wouldn't be a big gap between the two.

If they were to play exactly 30 matches on each 4 surface (Hard, Indoor Hard, Clay and Grass) their distribution would be like this.
Hard : 25 - 5
Indoor Hard : 3 - 27
Grass: 10 - 20
Clay: 25 - 5
H2H: 63 - 57

If the surfaces were more equally distributed, the H2H would be much closer.

Math skills? A simple search reveals:

Nadal is ahead 12-2 on clay=86% winning percentage. That is dominance and most RG matches were beatdowns.

Fed is up 2-1 on grass. Both losses by Nadal were very hard-fought 4 and 5 setters. Yes, the grass is slower these days but this is a superior surface for Fed.

Fed is up 5-4. That looks pretty close to me. In addition, Nad is 2-0 on the Aussie Open hard courts.

I can't think of another GOAT candidate with a head to head record with a contemporary like this. Like BigServe said, if Fed stays at his current Slam # and Nadal adds 3-4 more, it gets interesting. Finishing #1 for the year is a big deal but Woz also finished #1 without a Slam. GS titles are what they play for.

 

[Raz11]

Indoor Hard court is different to Outdoor and I don't need to explain cause I'm sure you know why. Nadal has barely even touched Federer on Indoor while Federer has always been competitive. As for the H2H in the slams, more than half of the matches were played on Nadal's preferred surface. Sure it is a flaw on Federer's career but he has other records that Nadal won't ever touch.

Well everyone is different cause titles are more important than a collection of matches. People will remember that Nadal dominated Federer on his surfaces while people will remember that Nadal failed to win the WTF even once. Pretty much all the all-time greats (except Nadal) has a WTF to show that they can beat the best. What does that say about Nadal, that he is incapable of beating the top players. You may say that the tournament doesn't matter but that fact that all the best shows up every year and that all the legends in tennis has won it there highlights the significance of the WTF.

Federer may not have davis cup, olympic gold or masters record but he does have the record for the WTF, #GS and others more important than those. At the end of the day, the H2H is an inaccurate representation of their H2H and should be used over the more important records. Nadal would need to win at least 1 more slam than Federer than be considered the GOAT and you are right, it is a bit early.

Tennis isn't about two players so why bring up the H2H. Tennis is about the whole tour and Federer has done a much better job at dominating the field than Nadal.