These days Slams > WTF > M1000 > #1 IMO
I actually do talk to a lot of tennis fans in real life (unlike the Fed echo chamber known as ttwh) and not once have I heard anyone even bring the WTF into the conversation when discussing the big 3. But, that’s just anecdotal evidence.Have you ask tennis players yourself?! Have you ever ask one? Because if you didn't you are putting words in their mouth. I never said that WTF is more important than a Slam in terms of value but from players perspective - do you think that they enter an event with the 8 best players and their thoughts are "This is not a Slam, I wont give my best"?! This is such a unreal take. Also one WTF title may not equal one Slam in terms of value but two WTF's are definately more harder to win than winning one Slam. And also you don't know how Slams would be perceived 20 years from now just like you probably didn't know the WTF were more prestegios than the Australian Open 30 years before that.
1. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am a Federer follower (I do like him by the way)I actually do talk to a lot of tennis fans in real life (unlike the Fed echo chamber known as ttwh) and not once have I heard anyone even bring the WTF into the conversation when discussing the big 3. But, that’s just anecdotal evidence.
Now, please go find me interviews of players saying their dream is to win the WTF, for every one you find (spoiler alert: you won’t find 1), I’ll find you 5 pros that talk about how they dream to win any of the 4 slams.
They all have some things over the others. And there's no mathematical formula to objectively decide what weights more. So we'll never get any definitive ansers lol. At most, one player may be overall, by most people who care about these things, as better or greater over time, which would speak of what factors are overall considered more important.Wow, is that the best you can do? Fed leads Nadal in 5/9 Masters since Masters matter so much to you. The truth is that Nadal has relied on clay his entire career where Federer was an all around player. He had an entire career to win a single WTF and hasn't done it. It's once a year and he should've made it a priority, but the truth is that he can't win it so the popular thing among you is to say it doesn't matter.
All three won 55 "big titles". If Rafa ends the year as YE1 all 3 will have 5 YE1s.[
They all have some things over the others. And there's no mathematical formula to objectively decide what weights more. So we'll never get any definitive ansers lol. At most, one player may be overall, by most people who care about these things, as better or greater over time, which would speak of what factors are overall considered more important.
Fed has weeks at n.1 over Rafa, and in a way over Novak too, but they may be getting too close. He has more all around great results probably as well. Plenty of streaks. Dominance over a certain period, though his record to Nadal then was awful. He has the slam record for now, but him and Raf are too close. I don't think much of a conclusion can be derived when two players are so close. The WTFs.
Nadal has the masters record (though Novak is close), the career win %, the Olympic Gold, the double slams at every surface, the RG record. The h2h vs Fed.
Novak has the NCYS, the period of dominance. The h2h. I don't remember how many WTFs he has, but obviously more than Rafa lol.
Any of them might end up with the slam record.
I think it'd be great if Rafa won a WTF, but I don't think it in any way disqualifies him, as they all have things over the others. IMO any slam, though especially AO or Wimbledon, would be the biggest for his legacy.
1 always looks better than 0.No. It was discussed many times. What will 1 title change? His WTF record will still look extremely poor compared to Federer's and Djokovic's. I don't see what a difference one title can make. It's not like he has a chance to become an all time great in this tournament or something.
no he doesn’t need to win it......i just can’t seem to fathom the idea of including it alongside slams in GOAT......it’s a tournament where you could lose twice, not once remember twice and still end up holding the trophy the following sunday......i mean even estoril 250 had a tougher format when it existed.......whatever charm it had ended after 2005 as the sport started becoming physical......these days it’s just a glorified exo conducted for tie and suit wearing old farts in the evenings in london.......Win at the WTF to be considered better than Federer and Djokovic?
Lets say Nadal finishes on 20 slams the same as Federer, has the same YE#1s, more Masters titles, will that 1 WTF be the difference between being the GOAT or not?
Specifically for non Nadal fans, as I understand his own fans will say it doesn't matter.
PS. He has to view this year as having a very decent chance. I hope he goes all out for it personally.
Don't ever recall Estoril having the top 8 players of the season in the draw.no he doesn’t need to win it......i just can’t seem to fathom the idea of including it alongside slams in GOAT......it’s a tournament where you could lose twice, not once remember twice and still end up holding the trophy the following sunday......i mean even estoril 250 had a tougher format when it existed.......
I mean...Going with the scenario in the OP, there are three fair factors here.
Weeks - Federer
WTF - Federer
h2h - Nadal
Fed still ahead.
To me the Masters are secondary here. Obviously, there's no grass masters plus Federer didn't peak for Masters the same way he did for slams earlier in his career.
You sure love to assume, don’t you?1. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am a Federer follower (I do like him by the way)
2. If I use your wording, just like any Nadal fanatic you redirect the subject when it doesn't suits you. You said tennis players and now suddenly its tennis fans who dont know **** most of the time. Not to mention that likely you speak with 2-3 people that are also Nadal fans. Who is better to evalute someone's success the Pro's + fans in this forum or the imaginery casuals you speak with?! Because I guarentee you that if Poll is created - it would go against your opinion.
3. You expect me to search interviews specially for you?! Just go watch Djokovic's reaction after he defeated Federer in 2012 - and we are speaking about a guy that have won it all.
4. What Pro's talk about their dreams?! Top players usually talk how the ultimate goal is winning a Slam BUT that doesn't imply that World Tours Finals are not. I mean who doesn't want to be among the best 8 players in the World and top them in one tournament. Its against any logic ...
I mean...I mean...
Weeks - Federer
WTF - Federer
h2h - Nadal
M1000 - Nadal
Olympic gold - Nadal
And how many titles in total for Nadal and Fed?I mean...
Miami - Federer
Monte Carlo - Nadal
Madrid - Nadal
Rome - Nadal
FO - Nadal
Wimbledon - Federer
Canada - Nadal
Cincy - Federer
Shanghai - Federer
Paris - Federer
WTF - Federer
The biggest events in tennis.
Can you explain this "tiger" thing? Is that meant to be a higher status than GOAT?There are essentially 4 surfaces... clay, hard, indoor hard, and grass. Djoker and Fed have won the biggest tourney in each of those domains. Rafa has not.
That being said, honestly, how does one even differentiate when it is this close. Some will say weeks at number one is the biggest thing missing. Others will say it is h2h missing for Fed.
It will go on and on unless someone separates by 2+ slams. That is why we should just hold to the slam count. If Rafa gets 21 and has more than anyone else, he is this mythical "tiger."
T-ennisCan you explain this "tiger" thing? Is that meant to be a higher status than GOAT?
Interesting. You do realise that for someone to be a TIGER though, they'd have to be miles ahead of the rest (i.e. win 25 slams vs. the next best's 20, probably win a CYGS, etc.)T-ennis
Tennis related, more defined, adds in that it does not matter what you argue or how with the "regardless."
A goat is a joke of an animal and is used in all sports and very generic.
A tiger? Well, enough said.
I mean it is all mythical and ridiculous anyways. So why not at least have a cool mascot and a better acronym?Interesting. You do realise that for someone to be a TIGER though, they'd have to be miles ahead of the rest (i.e. win 25 slams vs. the next best's 20, probably win a CYGS, etc.)
Fed has an Olympic gold ......Olympic gold compensates for lack of YEC win. Nadal only needs one slam more than Federer to compensate for overall number of titles and number one weeks. Djokovic not being leader in number 1 weeks or overall titles and not having Olympic gold would need two slams more than Federer and one more than Nadal to be considered GOAT.
1- SlamsNo the slam record will do. And Joker is in 3rd place as things are now anyways.
Masters and WTF aren’t equal. Total titles would come into play as well.1- Slams
I would agree that the Masters and WTF are equal, behind slams. Therefore if both Rafa and Roger wind up with 20 slams, the decider would be the total of Masters and WTF wins. Roger leads 5-0 in WTF and I believe Rafa leads Roger in Masters 35-28, giving Rafa a +2 advantage.
I agree but you can’t equate 1 master to 1 YEC when Nadal has 0 YEC and like 12 Monte Carlo titles boosting his masters... Fed has less overall but did better at moreThey are more equal than Slams and WTF, which the posters of a certain fanbase try to equate to each other. I wonder why?