D
Can Federer ever be GOAT if he can't beat his only rival?
- Thread starter samboy01
- Start date
davey25 said Fed's era was weak because "grandpa Agassi" was beating players from Fed's era.
Then TMF reminded davey25 that he had previously posted "
Agassi actually is a better and more consistent player during the young guy's reign in 2000-2004 than the Sampras reign of 93-98!"
tennis_guru
Banned
Daveyboy will conveniently ignore responded to that Pwnage cuz his tail is between his legs now. What a total loser.
powerangle
Legend
Exactly. I can respect differences in opinion but not a two-faced fanboy who spin a web of inconsistencies that he can't even untangle.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Exactly: 7 times out of the 21 times they played. Not even remotely close. That's a humiliating record for someone with pretensions of goatness.
J
Justdoit10
Guest
so Federer isnt the GOAT big deal. There are ways to nitpick stuff out of everyone with pretensions of goatness. Sampras no french open, Borg no US open...
J
Jchurch
Guest
Flip Grass and Clay seasons. You actually think Nadal would have that record.
RAFA HIMSELF SAYS THE H2H IS ONLY BECAUSE OF CLAY!!!!!!
tennis_guru
Banned
Why do you actually think they have met more times on clay (12) than all other surfaces combined (9)? Especially considering that HC's make up 50% of the tour? Any reasons?
abmk
Bionic Poster
irrelevant, the thread topic says " if he can't beat his only rival " - he already has 7 times.... so this thread fails and fails BIG time ..
secondly , 12 of those matches have been on clay , and that's a big reason for the H2H being so lop-sided , you ought to listen to more to what rafa says
abmk
Bionic Poster
yes, federer is *dumb* enough to make it to clay court finals time and again , he should have been tanking many of them to ensure the H2H doesn't go much in favour of rafa
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
I don't care about surfaces: 7-14 total = owned. And screaming won't make your argument more convincing, just more desperate.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
A potential GOAT should be reasonably performant on all surfaces. No excuse for being helpless on any.irrelevant, the thread topic says " if he can't beat his only rival " - he already has 7 times.... so this thread fails and fails BIG time ..
secondly , 12 of those matches have been on clay , and that's a big reason for the H2H being so lop-sided , you ought to listen to more to what rafa says
7 out of 21 is better than 0 but it's still very lame for a GOAT contender and his record in slams is even lamer: 2-6 and beaten in 3 different slams on 3 different surfaces. Doesn't look good. Too bad for the GOAT status: he tried and he failed... so far...
J
Justdoit10
Guest
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
What hatred? Facts my dear friend, just hard facts. A number of Fed fans seems to be unable to deal with them.
J
Justdoit10
Guest
I was just looking for an excuse to post that pic.
tennis_guru
Banned
Talker
Hall of Fame
Fed does have a poor H2H against Nadal and it matters that many were on clay.
No one denies that Nadal is better on clay and the H2H shows that.
For Fed to have a even H2H with Rafa with most of them on clay would mean that Fed is about as good as Nadal on clay, not true.
This is why the H2H doesn't " take away" from Fed's status. With so many on clay Rafa should be ahead, nothing new here.
No one denies that Nadal is better on clay and the H2H shows that.
For Fed to have a even H2H with Rafa with most of them on clay would mean that Fed is about as good as Nadal on clay, not true.
This is why the H2H doesn't " take away" from Fed's status. With so many on clay Rafa should be ahead, nothing new here.
powerangle
Legend
As I've stated before. Rafa only owns Roger on clay, that's it. He doesn't own him anywhere else. Rafa is arguably clay GOAT, nothing new here.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Yes, I don't care about surface discrimination. A GOAT has to post impressive results on all.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Great post and justdoit10: great picture
tennis_guru
Banned
Federer has 4 consecutive FO finals, 1 win. Rafa has no finals in the USO. I doubt he will have any in the future.
J
Jchurch
Guest
So since RAFA is so helpless on Hard Court does that mean he sucks? Comparing him to RODDICK, he is vastly inferior.
tennis_guru
Banned
If you think the GOAT has to post impressive results on ALL surfaces, that means you DO care about surface discrimination.
powerangle
Legend
Then unless Nadal pick up his fast hard court results (especially slams) he will be out of GOAT equation as well.
J
Jchurch
Guest
Of course you don't care about surfaces. Your loverboy is a lackluster performer on those hard courts in comparison with the rest of his achievements.
I wasn't screaming but merely saying it loudly
. Even RAFA says that the H2H is that way because of the favoring in the surface. At least half of their matches should be on hard since half of the tour is on hard. You ignoring that just shows your spite for Federer and lack of a rational mind.
J
Jchurch
Guest
Then there is no such thing as the GOAT.
Bud
Bionic Poster
Nobody is arguing that Nadal is the GOAT. The argument is that Federer is not because because he's Rafa's pigeon on all surfaces in slam finals. Rafa would have evened up the 1-2 H2H on grass as well had Federer been good enough to make it past the QF (nice to have that argument thrown in your face, huh?)
Federer is not even the best of his generation so he can't possibly be the greatest of all time.
Surfaces do not matter. Tecnology and schedules do not matter either.
The job of a tennis pro - any pro - is to participate in tournaments and win titles by beating whoever ends up on the other side of the net.
Whoever, period. Not necessarily Nadal, not any particular GOAT at anything, not the next person in the rankings, not any rival, contender, prince, godfather, godmother, or Barack Obama of all people.
Federer did that particular job better than anyone else, judging by the biggest and most representative tournaments - the Slams. That track record qualifies him as the GOAT up to date.
His H2H against Nadal, much like Nadal's H2H against Davydenko, is a discussion about match-ups, not a discussion about their whole careers, and therefore bringing up H2Hs in any GOAT-related talks is nonsense and off-topic.
The job of a tennis pro - any pro - is to participate in tournaments and win titles by beating whoever ends up on the other side of the net.
Whoever, period. Not necessarily Nadal, not any particular GOAT at anything, not the next person in the rankings, not any rival, contender, prince, godfather, godmother, or Barack Obama of all people.
Federer did that particular job better than anyone else, judging by the biggest and most representative tournaments - the Slams. That track record qualifies him as the GOAT up to date.
His H2H against Nadal, much like Nadal's H2H against Davydenko, is a discussion about match-ups, not a discussion about their whole careers, and therefore bringing up H2Hs in any GOAT-related talks is nonsense and off-topic.
tennis_guru
Banned
How can Federer be Rafa's pigeon on all surfaces when Nadal hasn't reached the finals of all surfaces? If Rafa would have evened it up on grass, then Federer would be way ahead had Rafa made it past the early round of W03,04, and 05. Yes he was a kid back then but Fed is geriatric now, you can't have it both ways.
YOU LOSE. Thanks for playing
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
He is certainly not inferior to Roddick on hard in any way. He already has a slam, an olympic gold and 5 master titles on hard AND he's much younger than Roddick.
Nadal is good on all surfaces but unlike Fed he leads the head to head vs his main rivals: Fed, Djoko and Murray and noone owns him like he owns Fed. Come on, getting beaten by the same guy in the final of RG, Wimbledon and AO. That is sheer domination for Rafa and sheer humiliation for Fed. Why did you think Fed cried? Because Rafa is his daddy. 3 surfaces. Slam finals. GOAT potential: out the window.
Last edited:
thalivest
Banned
How can Federer be Rafa's pigeon on all surfaces when Nadal hasn't reached the finals of all surfaces? If Rafa would have evened it up on grass, then Federer would be way ahead had Rafa made it past the early round of W03,04, and 05. Yes he was a kid back then but Fed is geriatric now, you can't have it both ways.
YOU LOSE. Thanks for playing
Yeah Nadal should have gone far at Wimbledon at barely 17, 18, and 19. After all Federer was doing so well on tour those years right. What a joke. And being 28 is not that old in tennis, especialy for a so called late bloomer like Federer. If he is already starting to suck before his 29th birthday when he sucked on tour all throughout his teens too then some GOAT he is.
Another funny inconsistency. *******s gloat endlessly about Federer beating a soon to turn 30 year old Sampras at Wimbledon 2001 (his last slam quarterfinal for another 2 years to boot, LOL), and also mock a nearly 31 year old Sampras's worst ever Wimbledon loss to Bastl as a way to argue Federer being superior to Sampras on grass (yeah right). However they dismiss any loss late blooming Federer had since turning 26 due to old age. Yet again what a joke.
Last edited:
J
Jchurch
Guest
How can Federer be Rafa's pigeon on all surfaces when Nadal hasn't reached the finals of all surfaces? If Rafa would have evened it up on grass, then Federer would be way ahead had Rafa made it past the early round of W03,04, and 05. Yes he was a kid back then but Fed is geriatric now, you can't have it both ways.
YOU LOSE. Thanks for playing
Rafa should have been there for USO 05-09 and AO 06,07, and 10
8 matches that most likely would have gone Federer's way. Instead he fails to show up. What a well rounded player
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Rafa has reached finals on all surfaces: clay, grass, hard, that's all the surfaces there are and more importantly he has beaten Fed on all of them. Fed has not. Until Fed does, it's check and mate, too bad.How can Federer be Rafa's pigeon on all surfaces when Nadal hasn't reached the finals of all surfaces?
YOU LOSE. Thanks for playing
Bud
Bionic Poster
The slams didn't matter 30+ years ago like they do today. Therefore, many of the past champions could have had at least 5 more had they even bothered to participate in them (AO, FO, etc.)
Federer only has 61 total titles. That is anemic compared to some of the past greats who had nearly twice that many.
Again, the GOAT argument is bogus.
Last edited:
tennis_guru
Banned
There are 4 distinct surface in tennis last I heard. Just because two of them are types of HC does not make then less different. Therefore Rafa has not reached the finals of all surfaces, especially the most important HC, the USO.
thalivest
Banned
Rafa should have been there for USO 05-09 and AO 06,07, and 10
8 matches that most likely would have gone Federer's way. Instead he fails to show up. What a well rounded player
He was injured and couldnt even play the Australian Open in 2006 idiot. You are blaming him for not reaching the final at an event he didnt even play. And why should Nadal have to reach the U.S Open final at ages 19, 20, 21, and even 22 when Federer himself wasnt good enough to get past the round of 16 of the U.S Open at those ages. Atleast Nadal was often making the semis or quarters. Nor could Federer get past the round of 16 of the Australian Open until he was 22 for that matter. And at the 2009 U.S Open the same guy who beat Nadal also beat Federer.
And 2 can play at that game. Where was Federer at Wimbledon this year where he would have gotten his butt kicked by Nadal had he made the final.
Rafa should have been there for USO 05-09 and AO 06,07, and 10
8 matches that most likely would have gone Federer's way. Instead he fails to show up. What a well rounded player
If your comparing 05 nadal and his 95 mph serve to 2010 nadal and his 120 mph serve, your an idiot.
Bud
Bionic Poster
Can't you just be happy that your favourite player was able to beat the greatest player of all time? It's a hell of an achievement. No one could look at Nadal's stats and call HIM the GOAT, not even top 3. Yet.
Bud
Bionic Poster
Hey, that's not my fault... participate more :lol:
I'm well on my way to Talk Tennis Guru :shock:
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
There are 3 different surfaces currently: hard, clay and grass. The different types of hard courts are subcategories. The last time they met on clay, grass and hard, Nadal beat Fed, demonstrating his versatility and superiority.
Originally Posted by fed_rulz
Scenario 1 (Federer's current profile -- NON-GOAT)
AO:
4W, 1F, 2 SF
RG:
1 W, 3 F, 1 SF
wimby:
6W, 1F
USO:
5W, 1F
Tennis Masters:
4W, 1F
Master's 1000
Clay: 5 W, 5F, 1 SF
Non-clay: 11W, 1F
H2H:
Rafael Nadal : 7-14
Novak djokovic: 9-5
Juan Carlos ferrero : 9-3
Fernando Gonzalez : 12-1
David Nalbandian : 10-8
David Ferrer: 10-0
Andreas Seppi : 6-0
Gael Monfils : 5-0
Nikolay Davydenko : 13-2
Andy Roddick : 19-2
Mikhail Youzhny : 10-0
Marat Safin : 10-2
Miscellaneous:
23 consecutive SF in Grandslams, 18 out of last 20 finals
If Fed has lost in the SF of every tournament he lost to Nadal in the finals, then according to some ******** logic, he has a stronger case for GOAT.
Scenario 2 (Federer's GOAT profile)
AO:
4W, 3 SF
RG:
1 W, 4 SF
wimby:
6W, 1SF
USO:
5W, 1F
Tennis Masters:
4W, 1F
Master's 1000
Clay : 5 W, 6 SF
non-clay : 11W, 1F
H2H:
Rafael Nadal : 7-2
Novak djokovic: 8-6
Juan Carlos ferrero : 8-4
Fernando Gonzalez : 11-2
David Nalbandian : 8-10
David Ferrer: 9-1
Andreas Seppi : 5-1
Gael Monfils : 4-1
Nikolay Davydenko : 12-3
Andy Roddick : 18-3
Mikhail Youzhny : 9-1
Marat Safin : 9-3
Miscellaneous:
23 consecutive SF in Grandslams, 14 out of last 20 finals
Clearly, Scenario 2 >> Scenario 1 ... Amriteorwhat?
I would really like to see a response to this...
thalivest
Banned
I never said Nadal was the GOAT at this point. Neither is Federer though. I am not going to falsely proclaim Federer the GOAT just to try and make Nadal look better.
Rafael Nadal vs other grandslam champions (# of slams):
2-0 vs Agassi (8 )
1-0 vs Costa (1)
4-3 vs Del Potro (1)
14-7 vs Djokovic (1)
14-7 vs Federer (16)
7-2 vs Ferrero (1)
3-3 vs Gaudio (1)
6-4 vs Hewitt (2)
2-0 vs Ivanisevic (1)
2-0 vs Johansson (1)
6-2 vs Moya (1)
5-3 vs Roddick (1)
2-0 vs Safin (2)
PERFECT! No losing records against GS champions.
Roger Federer vs other grandslam champions (# of slams):
8-3 vs Agassi (8 )
0-1 vs Bruguera (2)
4-1 vs Chang (1)
3-2 vs Costa (1)
6-2 vs Del Potro (1)
9-5 vs Djokovic (1)
9-3 vs Ferrero (1)
5-0 vs Gaudio (1)
17-6 vs Hewitt (2)
2-0 vs Ivanisevic (1)
7-0 vs Johansson (1)
1-4 vs Kafelnikov (2)
2-0 vs Krajicek (1)
1-2 vs Kuerten (3)
7-0 vs Moya (1)
7-14 vs Nadal (8 )
0-3 vs Rafter (2)
19-2 vs Roddick (1)
9-2 vs Safin (2)
1-0 vs Sampras (14)
FAR FROM PERFECT! He has 5 losing head-to-head against GS champions who have won at least 2 each, including his biggest rival in his own era!
Look no matter how you twist it, Rafael Nadal is the best. All he has to do is win a couple of more slams and it's official...
2-0 vs Agassi (8 )
1-0 vs Costa (1)
4-3 vs Del Potro (1)
14-7 vs Djokovic (1)
14-7 vs Federer (16)
7-2 vs Ferrero (1)
3-3 vs Gaudio (1)
6-4 vs Hewitt (2)
2-0 vs Ivanisevic (1)
2-0 vs Johansson (1)
6-2 vs Moya (1)
5-3 vs Roddick (1)
2-0 vs Safin (2)
PERFECT! No losing records against GS champions.
Roger Federer vs other grandslam champions (# of slams):
8-3 vs Agassi (8 )
0-1 vs Bruguera (2)
4-1 vs Chang (1)
3-2 vs Costa (1)
6-2 vs Del Potro (1)
9-5 vs Djokovic (1)
9-3 vs Ferrero (1)
5-0 vs Gaudio (1)
17-6 vs Hewitt (2)
2-0 vs Ivanisevic (1)
7-0 vs Johansson (1)
1-4 vs Kafelnikov (2)
2-0 vs Krajicek (1)
1-2 vs Kuerten (3)
7-0 vs Moya (1)
7-14 vs Nadal (8 )
0-3 vs Rafter (2)
19-2 vs Roddick (1)
9-2 vs Safin (2)
1-0 vs Sampras (14)
FAR FROM PERFECT! He has 5 losing head-to-head against GS champions who have won at least 2 each, including his biggest rival in his own era!
Look no matter how you twist it, Rafael Nadal is the best. All he has to do is win a couple of more slams and it's official...
GetBetterer
Hall of Fame
Before I start, I would like to mention that he has beaten his (only? lol wow) rival, Rafael Nadal twice. I know he's lost to Nadal more, but it already disregards your thread title.
mltaylor:
He's right, because Federer has beaten him. No need for a time machine for those things.
So even though we've already proven these blatant terms to be false, I just thought I would bring this up too:
Nadal:
Turned pro in 2001 (age 15)
2001 (age 15, year 1) - end of year ATP ranking 811
2002 (16, year 2) - 200
2003 (17, year 3) - 49
2004 (18, year 4) - 51
2005 (19, year 5) - 2 (RG)
2006 (20, year 6) - 2 (RG)
2007 (21, year 7) - 2 (RG)
2008 (22, year 8) - 2 (RG, Wimby)
Federer:
Turned pro in 1998 (age 17)
1998 (age 17, year 1) - end of year ATP ranking 301
1999 (18, year 2) - 65
2000 (19, year 3) - 29
2001 (20, year 4) - 13
2002 (21, year 5) - 6
2003 (22, year 6) - 2 (Wimbledon)
2004 (23, year 7) - 1 (Australian Open, Wimbledon, US Open)
2005 (24, year 8) - 1 (Wimbledon, US Open)
=================================================
Federer at the age of 24 had 6 Grand Slam's under his belt.
Rafael right now (24 years old) has 8 Grand Slam's under his belt.
Federer got 10 more in 5 years. - Rate of 2 Grand Slams per year.
Nadal has gotten 8 in 5 years. - Rate of 1.6 Grand Slams per year.
Now, a look at their TOTAL (all Grand Slam trophies) combined is:
Federer: 16/8 = 2 Grand slams per year
Nadal: 8/6 = 1.33 Grand slams pear year
In their entire Pro-time (Fed started in '98, Rafa in '01):
Federer: 16/13 = 1.230769 trophies per year
Nadal: 8/10 = 0.8 trophies per year
Now, I'm going to go into Nadal a little bit, without using many mathematical facts. Some people comment on Nadal's way of playing Tennis and that injuries come early. Taking that into effect, he may end soon, but let's assume he doesn't. However, Nadal hasn't reached ANY U.S. Open Finals yet either. But, just by my niceness, let's assume he wins them. Again, assuming he wins ALL the Grand Slam finals from 2010 to 2014 which is a total of 17 including this year's U.S. Open, which at the date of this post hasn't been played yet. 17 + 8 = 25. So, that's a potential of a total of 25 possible Grand Slams. Let's take off U.S. Open's and we get 5 if we include this year's U.S. Open. 25 - 5 = 20. Now, we have a BEST of 20 that he can get disregarding possible injuries, possible muscular enhancing drugs (I sense a discrepancy between 2004 - 2005) and other people winning other Grand Slams. Something tells me at least 2 of those factors will have a role in not letting him win. Nadal also believes the tour is a little hard on people so he wants it changed, in addition to that, he didn't make the Quarter finals of this year's Australian Open, lost at least year's French Open in the 4th round, and didn't participate in last year's Wimbledon. Even with that Federer has a better trophy winning ratio in comparison to Nadal, not to mention that he's been beaten by other players and that they will be there to defeat him again. Just because you have a high win-to-loss ratio against a player doesn't mean you'll never lose to him.
If that was too long to read, I'll
separate
it
like
this
for
your
feeble
minds
.
mltaylor:
He's right, because Federer has beaten him. No need for a time machine for those things.
So even though we've already proven these blatant terms to be false, I just thought I would bring this up too:
Nadal:
Turned pro in 2001 (age 15)
2001 (age 15, year 1) - end of year ATP ranking 811
2002 (16, year 2) - 200
2003 (17, year 3) - 49
2004 (18, year 4) - 51
2005 (19, year 5) - 2 (RG)
2006 (20, year 6) - 2 (RG)
2007 (21, year 7) - 2 (RG)
2008 (22, year 8) - 2 (RG, Wimby)
Federer:
Turned pro in 1998 (age 17)
1998 (age 17, year 1) - end of year ATP ranking 301
1999 (18, year 2) - 65
2000 (19, year 3) - 29
2001 (20, year 4) - 13
2002 (21, year 5) - 6
2003 (22, year 6) - 2 (Wimbledon)
2004 (23, year 7) - 1 (Australian Open, Wimbledon, US Open)
2005 (24, year 8) - 1 (Wimbledon, US Open)
=================================================
Federer at the age of 24 had 6 Grand Slam's under his belt.
Rafael right now (24 years old) has 8 Grand Slam's under his belt.
Federer got 10 more in 5 years. - Rate of 2 Grand Slams per year.
Nadal has gotten 8 in 5 years. - Rate of 1.6 Grand Slams per year.
Now, a look at their TOTAL (all Grand Slam trophies) combined is:
Federer: 16/8 = 2 Grand slams per year
Nadal: 8/6 = 1.33 Grand slams pear year
In their entire Pro-time (Fed started in '98, Rafa in '01):
Federer: 16/13 = 1.230769 trophies per year
Nadal: 8/10 = 0.8 trophies per year
Now, I'm going to go into Nadal a little bit, without using many mathematical facts. Some people comment on Nadal's way of playing Tennis and that injuries come early. Taking that into effect, he may end soon, but let's assume he doesn't. However, Nadal hasn't reached ANY U.S. Open Finals yet either. But, just by my niceness, let's assume he wins them. Again, assuming he wins ALL the Grand Slam finals from 2010 to 2014 which is a total of 17 including this year's U.S. Open, which at the date of this post hasn't been played yet. 17 + 8 = 25. So, that's a potential of a total of 25 possible Grand Slams. Let's take off U.S. Open's and we get 5 if we include this year's U.S. Open. 25 - 5 = 20. Now, we have a BEST of 20 that he can get disregarding possible injuries, possible muscular enhancing drugs (I sense a discrepancy between 2004 - 2005) and other people winning other Grand Slams. Something tells me at least 2 of those factors will have a role in not letting him win. Nadal also believes the tour is a little hard on people so he wants it changed, in addition to that, he didn't make the Quarter finals of this year's Australian Open, lost at least year's French Open in the 4th round, and didn't participate in last year's Wimbledon. Even with that Federer has a better trophy winning ratio in comparison to Nadal, not to mention that he's been beaten by other players and that they will be there to defeat him again. Just because you have a high win-to-loss ratio against a player doesn't mean you'll never lose to him.
If that was too long to read, I'll
separate
it
like
this
for
your
feeble
minds
.
Similar threads
