1 day ago Federer became the GOAT, only player in the history having won 14 slams and all 4. Haters of Federer or envious persons instead of accepting the fact started somehow to argue the fact. But 5x5=25 can't be accepted or rejected by people, it is either right or not not depending on opinion of people. I understand the desire of some hot fans of Federer that it would be better if he had better against Nadal. Nadal, Nadal .... I hear his name so much. But let's see and analyse numbers without emotions. Of course, Nadal is great player and by his 23 he has got already 6 slams. But yet Nadal can't be even considered to be compared with Federer by 2 facts. FACT1. Nadal is not in the list of all 4 slam winners. He didn't win US Open still. And nobody knows will he be able. So Nadal is not in the list with Federer, Agassi, Laver,Emerson, Budge, Perry. FACT2. Nadal has got only 6 slams by time. Compared with 14 it is not so much, and it is so early to take him into consideration even if u observe his strong game today. Now coming to their H2H. Nadal leads 13:7, totally they played 20 matches, but take into consideration that among them 11 matches were on clay and there Nadal really leads 9:2, while 9 were on faster courts where Federer leads 5:4. So what here is ubnormal? Nadal is strong clay-court player where endurance is in the first stage, so he won Fed much more than Fed beated him on the clay, is not the fact normal? Did u surprise if on clay , say Borg beats Mcenroe all the time, or say Kuerten beats Agassi all the time ( by the way Kuerten beated him also on faster courts) ???? And do u know Agassi never played on clay against Kuerten, and Mcenroe against Borg, they both couldn't simply even reached the finals to play against them, clay-courters. Why did u forget these and many similar facts and why so u don't count Borg much higher than Mcenroe, and don't compare Agassi with Kuerten ? I thought all the times members here understood that clay is another surface. Becker with his 6 slams never dreamed about clay, same as Edberg. Bruguera, Kuerten, Ferrero, Moya ... where are their slams on faster courts ? And why here everybody is trying to underrate Federers achievement on clay and overall? What did Nadal extraordinary by his 23 ? It is that he won 2 slams on fast courts - Wimbledon and AO. It is not ordinary for clay-court player, but anyhow Borg did win 6 RG and 5 Wimbledons, Vilas won US Open and AO, and of course RG, Lendl won RG, US and AO and etc... But this is another theme. U'd wait and watch will Nadal be able to win more and more, and in US Open. But at the moment Federer is really the GOAT. Only Laver could be theoreticlally compared with him because of 2 Grand slams and 8 slams overall. But this is the matter of personal preference: what is better 14 slams + all 4 OR 8 slams + all 4 + 2 times Grand Slam. Mathematically it depends on weights which u assign to every from 3 criteria: number of slams, how many different slams, and consequitivness of victories.