Fed Fans - Who would you rather overtake Federer's slam total?

Who would you rather overtake Federer's slam total?


  • Total voters
    196
WTF is important but never discussed in the media in terms of GOAThood. So if Rafa's career ends up:

  • 21 slams
  • won all four slams
  • only man of the three to win on all three surfaces twice
He is immediately disqualified from GOAThood because he utterly dominated RG? lol
He may never reach 21 slams and win all GS twice. Djokovic may reach that feat starting next FO.:):)

No world tour finals and most of his GS on clay in my opinion can't be GOAT.

On Clay, Nadal is the best player ever but there's a lack of competition on this surface compared to the other surfaces. This year FO will be interesting as there will be a fit Djokovic aiming to win his 2nd french open and holding all 4 slams at the same time. On the other hand Nadal will be aiming in winning his 12th FO and 18th GS.

Please admit the last two FO have been terrible. Before the event has even started you knew Nadal would win it. Thiem is a great player but to have him as your main threat just proves how weak the competition is.

And you tend to forget that Federer and Djokovic are amazing clay court players in their own rights. Having won the event once in the Nadal era and played multiple finals is quite an achievement.

In my opinion Djokovic is already above Nadal in the goat debate. If he wins a 2nd FO he may overtake Federer's achievements. Holding all 4 slams at the same time having won all masters series 5 time champion at the world tour finals better head to head record with Nadal and Fed.

Nadal has never dominated the tour as Fed did in his prime losing just 4 games a year is an incredible feat. (2006 season)

Can you be considered as the GOAT when you've lost 1st round at the australian open in 2016 at wimbledon in 2013 against players like Steve Darcis Justin Brown Lucas Pouille at the US open Rosol at wimbledon?:p:p
 
Last edited:
He may never reach 21 slams and win all GS twice. Djokovic may reach that feat starting next FO.:):)

No world tour finals and most of his GS on clay in my opinion can't be GOAT.

On Clay, Nadal is the best player ever but there's a lack of competition on this surface compared to the other surfaces. This year FO will be interesting as there will be a fit Djokovic aiming to win his 2nd french open and holding all 4 slams at the same time. On the other hand Nadal will be aiming in winning his 12th FO and 18th GS.

Please admit the last two FO have been terrible. Before the event has even started you knew Nadal would win it. Thiem is a great player but to have him as your main threat just proves how weak the competition is.

And you tend to forget that Federer and Djokovic are amazing clay court players in their own rights. Having won the event once in the Nadal era and played multiple finals is quite an achievement.

In my opinion Djokovic is already above Nadal in the goat debate. If he wins a 2nd FO he may overtake Federer's achievements. Holding all 4 slams at the same time having won all masters series 5 time champion at the world tour finals better head to head record with Nadal and Fed.

Nadal has never dominated the tour as Fed did in his prime losing just 4 games a year is an incredible feat. (2006 season)

Can you be considered as the GOAT when you've lost 1st round at the australian open in 2016 at wimbledon in 2013 against players like Steve Darcis Justin Brown Lucas Pouille at the US open Rosol at wimbledon?:p:p
Your quite against Nadal here
Nadal has not won the WTF but Federer has not won Monte Carlo or Rome to. Nadal has not sustained dominance the way Federer and Djokovic they are more consistent in their best years for sure but Nadal has had great indivdual smaller runs which made up for that. Like winning 3 slams on 3 different surfaces on a year etc etc. I think Djokovic and Nadal are very close. Nadal has 7 more titles,2 more slams and a Oly medal and 1 more M1000s. Djokovic has more consistency and has spent longer at number one and won 5 WTFs.
Nadal trumps the other two on Clay more they trump on him om HC/Grass.
 
Your quite against Nadal here
Nadal has not won the WTF but Federer has not won Monte Carlo or Rome to. Nadal has not sustained dominance the way Federer and Djokovic they are more consistent in their best years for sure but Nadal has had great indivdual smaller runs which made up for that. Like winning 3 slams on 3 different surfaces on a year etc etc. I think Djokovic and Nadal are very close. Nadal has 7 more titles,2 more slams and a Oly medal and 1 more M1000s. Djokovic has more consistency and has spent longer at number one and won 5 WTFs.
Nadal trumps the other two on Clay more they trump on him om HC/Grass.
Djokovic hasn't lost a set against Nadal on hardcourt since 2013.

Since 2011 they have won 7 times against each other on clay.

Djokovic has won all the masters series event and has 5 world tour finals to his name. He's beaten Nadal at every GS and all masters series and world tour finals.

He's already above Nadal.

FO 2019 will be very interesting.

Rome and Monte Carlo are amazing tournaments don't get me wrong. But they can't be compared to a GS of a WTF. By the way Nadal has never won Miami and Paris masters.
 
Last edited:

DSH

Hall of Fame
I'm dreaming of the USO. :) Winning 11 years after his last title, he'll have the record there and 6 titles at 3 majors. And then just the fact that it's the last Slam in the season, and the feeling of victory will carry until the end of the season unlike if he won Wimby and then lost at the USO.
fed is done at the open, sorry to tell you mate.
 
Out of what exactly?

If you remove grass from Fed's resume, he has 12 slams and is not in GOAT contention
If you remove hard from his resume, he has 9 slams and is not in GOAT contention

All of which is irrelevant because a slam is a slam and nothing needs removing.
Out of top tier. 12 slams is pretty damn good. Nadal only has 6 off clay. 9 is also > 6 in case you didn't notice.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
Your initial comment was that he had too many missed opportunities as an argument in in favor of Nadal and against Djokovic correct? I responded by saying he didn't have many missed opportunities because he lost to ATG during that span...not scrubs. Then you responded by making comparisons between djokovic and federer.. and the importance of consistency between them.....when we're talking about Nadal and Djokovic. So if consistency is a high criteria for you wouldn't you rather have Djokovic surpass Federer then Nadal? Since Djokovic has more weeks at #1, more year end #1s, more years winning 3 GS, more QF, SF in lesser span, more WTFs, etc? Just Curious.
This thread is about the slam record...not weeks at #1, more year end #1s, more WTFs, etc. I think Djokovic (who has the more complete/all-suface game than Rafa) has lost too many slams he should have won, and should have dominated the slams from 2012 - 2014 as he did in 2011. If peak Djokovic had consistently played at his best (like peak Federer did), he would have the slam record. Short and simple.

I'm more impressed with Rafa's slam record than Nole's. He's mostly won at the slam he should win, and has won many slams he shouldn't have won.
 
This thread is about the slam record...not weeks at #1, more year end #1s, more WTFs, etc. I think Djokovic (who has the more complete/all-suface game than Rafa) has lost too many slams he should have won, and should have dominated the slams from 2012 - 2014 as he did in 2011. If peak Djokovic had consistently played at his best (like peak Federer did), he would have the slam record. Short and simple.

I'm more impressed with Rafa's slam record than Nole's. He's mostly won at the slam he should win, and has won many slams he shouldn't have won.
On one hand, you are saying slams is all that matters or at least is what we are talking about here. Okay.

Then on the other hand, you are saying Nadal's record impresses you more because he won more where he shouldn't have whereas Novak blew slams he should have won?

So, even if Novak surpasses Nadal's slam count, you will still say Rafa's "impresses" more?

If it's just about slams, it shouldn't be relative to anything including your expectations, I hope if Djokovic does win many more slams, you give him credit.

I doubt it though as you seem biased.
 
He may never reach 21 slams and win all GS twice. Djokovic may reach that feat starting next FO.:):)

No world tour finals and most of his GS on clay in my opinion can't be GOAT.

On Clay, Nadal is the best player ever but there's a lack of competition on this surface compared to the other surfaces. This year FO will be interesting as there will be a fit Djokovic aiming to win his 2nd french open and holding all 4 slams at the same time. On the other hand Nadal will be aiming in winning his 12th FO and 18th GS.

Please admit the last two FO have been terrible. Before the event has even started you knew Nadal would win it. Thiem is a great player but to have him as your main threat just proves how weak the competition is.

And you tend to forget that Federer and Djokovic are amazing clay court players in their own rights. Having won the event once in the Nadal era and played multiple finals is quite an achievement.

In my opinion Djokovic is already above Nadal in the goat debate. If he wins a 2nd FO he may overtake Federer's achievements. Holding all 4 slams at the same time having won all masters series 5 time champion at the world tour finals better head to head record with Nadal and Fed.

Nadal has never dominated the tour as Fed did in his prime losing just 4 games a year is an incredible feat. (2006 season)

Can you be considered as the GOAT when you've lost 1st round at the australian open in 2016 at wimbledon in 2013 against players like Steve Darcis Justin Brown Lucas Pouille at the US open Rosol at wimbledon?:p:p
I didn't say he would definately reach 21 slams or win all GS twice. I asked you this:

If Rafa's career ends up:
  • 21 slams
  • won all four slams
  • only man of the three to win on all three surfaces twice
Would you consider him GOAT? You say no in your opinion but it actually makes a very good case if you are being objective.

Yes, the last two RG have been terrible, so were the last two US Opens, the 2017 Wimbledon and the 2018 AO. What does that have to do with anything? Also, don't confuse lack of competition on clay with utter dominance by one player.

Djokovic is on fire at the moment but 17>15. Fed dominated the tour in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 no doubt. Do you know what changed from 2008 onwards? Maybe the emergence of two other ATG's that were just as good as him?

So to summarise your post, if the slam count is equal or even greater you can't be considered GOAT because you have lost to Darcis, Brown, Pouille and Rosol but it's cool to be considered GOAT if you've lost to Stakhovsky, Seppi, Tsitsipas, Gulbis, Tsonga from two sets up at Wimby, Anderson from two sets and match point up at Wimby & Robredo.... ok.
 
I didn't say he would definately reach 21 slams or win all GS twice. I asked you this:

If Rafa's career ends up:
  • 21 slams
  • won all four slams
  • only man of the three to win on all three surfaces twice
Would you consider him GOAT? You say no in your opinion but it actually makes a very good case if you are being objective.

Yes, the last two RG have been terrible, so were the last two US Opens, the 2017 Wimbledon and the 2018 AO. What does that have to do with anything? Also, don't confuse lack of competition on clay with utter dominance by one player.

Djokovic is on fire at the moment but 17>15. Fed dominated the tour in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 no doubt. Do you know what changed from 2008 onwards? Maybe the emergence of two other ATG's that were just as good as him?

So to summarise your post, if the slam count is equal or even greater you can't be considered GOAT because you have lost to Darcis, Brown, Pouille and Rosol but it's cool to be considered GOAT if you've lost to Stakhovsky, Seppi, Tsitsipas, Gulbis, Tsonga from two sets up at Wimby, Anderson from two sets and match point up at Wimby & Robredo.... ok.
Goat is not only the number of slams. It's the way you have dominated the tour, the number of weeks as world number 1, year end number 1, World tour finals.
There"s no doubt Nadal is the greatest player ever on clay, probably the best lefty player ever to have played the game, but in my opinion he's not the greatest.

His numbers of GS are inflated by his wins at Roland Garros. Greatest clay player? no doubt about that. But not the greatest on hard courts grass indoors etc etc Clay is a specialist surface that he dominates and there's a lack of competition especially the last two years. Schwartzman was the only player who took a set away from Nadal.

Djokovic is already above Nadal in my opinion. Better distribution of his slam wins. He's won all masters series event won the world tour finals 5 times. Better numbers on number of weeks as world number 1. Better Ratio win lost to Nadal who he has beaten in all GS masters series event world tour finals. He's held all 4 slams at the same time. His 2015 season is probably one of the best ever. Nadal dominates the tour on clay but has never dominated the tour like Fed and the Djoker have.

I can confirm you that an aging Fed will lose more and more to players below his level and standarts. You forgot to mention Millman at the USO 2018 . But aren't we lucky to have him play a few more years? He would have never lost to those players in his prime. Fed has dominated the tour like no one between 2003 and 2010. 16 GS in that period with mostly his losses coming to Nadal the greatest player ever on clay. Not bad. On the other hand Nadal lost to Steve Darcis at Wimbledon 2013 in probably one of his best years on tour....
 
Rod Laver believes that Novak Djokovic will overtake Roger Federer's 20 Grand Slam titles. The Serb holds 15 crowns and looks forward to adding more to his achievements list in the future.

The Australian legend thinks Djokovic has huge chances to reach and then pass the Swiss. "I think Federer has maybe got another Wimbledon in him, but he is battling a little bit", said Laver. "His age and strokes are not quite the same as they were two years ago.

But he is still a force to be fought with. When you look at the others, Novak and Rafa, I would think Novak will certainly. When you look at his age and form winning the last two, I would say Djokovic can eclipse Roger.'
 
[QUOT
Djokovic hasn't lost a set against Nadal on hardcourt since 2013.

Since 2011 they have won 7 times against each other on clay.

Djokovic has won all the masters series event and has 5 world tour finals to his name. He's beaten Nadal at every GS and all masters series and world tour finals.

He's already above Nadal.

FO 2019 will be very interesting.

Rome and Monte Carlo are amazing tournaments don't get me wrong. But they can't be compared to a GS of a WTF. By the way Nadal has never won Miami and Paris masters.
Pre 2011 counts too. 16-7 overall on clay. Djokovic peaked on clay in 2008-2009 too. Gave Nadal his toughest competition at Hamburg and RG. And won Rome. 2009 was the 2nd best player of the clay player before the Madrid epic. Took a set of Nadal at MC and challenged him at DC and nearly took Rafa out in Madrid. But you count 2015-16 Nadal on clay? That is unfair.
 
[QUOT


Pre 2011 counts too. 16-7 overall on clay. Djokovic peaked on clay in 2008-2009 too. Gave Nadal his toughest competition at Hamburg and RG. And won Rome. 2009 was the 2nd best player of the clay player before the Madrid epic. Took a set of Nadal at MC and challenged him at DC and nearly took Rafa out in Madrid. But you count 2015-16 Nadal on clay? That is unfair.
I have never said that Djokovic was as good as Nadal on clay. I took the results from 2011 as it was the first times that Djokovic managed to get a win against Nadal on Clay. Since then, they have split their meetings 7 each on clay. I wanted to prove that the french open may finally be exciting as Djokovic may be able to challenge the greatest player ever on the surface.

By the way, Nadal has won twice against djokovic madrid 2017 and Rome 2018 where Djokovic was nowhere close to his best.
2016 Nadal was really good on clay. He had won the Monte Carlo Championships a tournament he hadn't won for a while.

I have booked my ticket for the FO open final as i am hoping for a final between Novak and Nadal. This match could be a big turning point for both players.

From 2011 i would say Novak was Nadal's biggest threat on clay. Before it was Roger. 1 FO 4 finals in a row. He was only stopped by the best player ever on the surface.
 
Last edited:

NKDM

Professional
Out of what exactly?

If you remove grass from Fed's resume, he has 12 slams and is not in GOAT contention
If you remove hard from his resume, he has 9 slams and is not in GOAT contention

All of which is irrelevant because a slam is a slam and nothing needs removing.
Let me start by saying I don't agree with 'removing clay' to show how Nadal is NOT a candidate for GOAT. (which is what I reckon you're trying to counter with this tit-for-tat post here)

That said, your post actually does a great job proving just how good Federer actually IS -

12 and 9 slams are more than the entire career slams of many of the top 10 all time list - and that is after removing each of his best surfaces.

You remove Nadal's best and he's left with what - 6 slams?

Anyway, again I reiterate that doesn't mean Nadal isn't in the GOAT conversation.
 
Makes no sense being a fan of both of them if you know tennis.
This forum is a strange thing.

Those two is the opposites when it comes to tennis, personality... everything.

Rafa is like the middle brother not really affected and staying out of it lol
It comes 99 percent from Nadal hate.

There is 1 cool guy who just happens to like both on these boards to be fair but many I saw only start to like Djokovic after he beat Nadal a lot in 2011.

Djokovic does not need fans like that.
 
It comes 99 percent from Nadal hate.

There is 1 cool guy who just happens to like both on these boards to be fair but many I saw only start to like Djokovic after he beat Nadal a lot in 2011.

Djokovic does not need fans like that.
Supporting Federer and Novak at the same time it’s like supporting Barcelona and Madrid football at the same time. (I know you are not into that but it’s the only sport I know a similar comparison to)
It doesn’t make sense.
It’s like supporting USA and Russia at the same in time in the Cold War :-D
 
Novak hate fed fans so
Half of the Novak fans here were Fed fans until 2011

It’s not like that in the real world. There is a very clear distinction between Fed and Novak as they are complete opposite playstyles and everything what Fed hates about what tennis have become.
I don't see them being opposite myself. Wouldn't have liked one of them if I saw it that way. Fed and Nadal are and always will be the two contrasts when it comes to their games.

And I really don't like all this talk about hate between two players still going on today because of some little incidents that happened a long time ago. That's in very distant past for both.
 
I don't see them being opposite myself. Wouldn't have liked one of them if I saw it that way. Fed and Nadal are and always will be the two contrasts when it comes to their games.

And I really don't like all this talk about hate between two players still going on today because of some little incidents that happened a long time ago. That's in very distant past for both.
Federer think Novaks kind of game is destroying the sport.
I do admit Federer really loves tennis. But he prefer the kind of tennis he plays.
 
I don't see them being opposite myself. Wouldn't have liked one of them if I saw it that way. Fed and Nadal are and always will be the two contrasts when it comes to their games.

And I really don't like all this talk about hate between two players still going on today because of some little incidents that happened a long time ago. That's in very distant past for both.
They hate each other for sure
 
Federer think Novaks kind of game is destroying the sport.
I do admit Federer really loves tennis. But he prefer the kind of tennis he plays.
Where did you get that from? :rolleyes:
They hate each other for sure
I feel like you would prefer that over them not hating each other. :p Not that I would have anything against that being true or your thinking, in a way that would mean there is some more spice to their rivalry which has been great either way.
 
Where did you get that from? :rolleyes:

I feel like you would prefer that over them not hating each other. :p Not that I would have anything against that being true or your thinking, in a way that would mean there is some more spice to their rivalry which has been great either way.
No not really I just think it's very clear they have disdain for each other but play nice. Tennis is very PC nowadays
 
Where did you get that from? :rolleyes:

I feel like you would prefer that over them not hating each other. :p Not that I would have anything against that being true or your thinking, in a way that would mean there is some more spice to their rivalry which has been great either way.
That’s what Fed fans think too.
Fed fans in the real world.

Do you know people into tennis in the real world that are fans of both?
I haven’t and I’ve been pretty deep into it.
Even among players and teams you cannot find that.
 
No not really I just think it's very clear they have disdain for each other but play nice. Tennis is very PC nowadays
Fair enough. I agree with that last part in general.
That’s what Fed fans think too.
Fed fans in the real world.

Do you know people into tennis in the real world that are fans of both?
I haven’t and I’ve been pretty deep into it.
Even among players and teams you cannot find that.
Why discarding the opinion of all Fed fans here though? They can be just like any of us and into tennis in "the real world". I won't assume either way without knowing more.

I have met a lot of Fed fans who prefer Djokovic over Nadal. My tennis pals being the first to come to mind. Obviously being a big fan of two great players that are competing against each other is rare whatever combo we are talking about. Rivalries are something big.

You didn't answer my question though. Where did you get the idea that Federer himself thinks Novak's kind of game is destroying the sport? That's a pretty bold thing to say.
 
Fair enough. I agree with that last part in general.

Why discarding the opinion of all Fed fans here though? They can be just like any of us and into tennis in "the real world". I won't assume either way without knowing more.

I have met a lot of Fed fans who prefer Djokovic over Nadal. My tennis pals being the first to come to mind. Obviously being a big fan of two great players that are competing against each other is rare whatever combo we are talking about. Rivalries are something big.

You didn't answer my question though. Where did you get the idea that Federer himself thinks Novak's kind of game is destroying the sport? That's a pretty bold thing to say.
Because he has complained about that. That players not playing aggressive and not running to the net.

What a different tennis world you have been living in than mine ;)
 
Because he has complained about that. That players not playing aggressive and not running to the net.

What a different tennis world you have been living in than mine ;)
Djokovic plays aggressive tennis and comes to the net more frequently than most players today. So I'm afraid that Federer's complaints are directed at someone else.

Clearly... ;)
 
Top