The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
I’m just enjoying making him look like an even bigger fool
Federer vs Nadal Who Is Ahead As Of Now?
- Thread starter Neptune
- Start date
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I think the underlying debate is whether we should prioritize concentration vs diversity. Meaning is it better to be the very best at one thing (or one aspect of the game) or to have still high but lower peaks in a broader swathe of the game?
I have repeatedly said that I think Nadal in clay is the only unassailable claim to tennis GOAThood. But Fed is better in the rest of the pro Tour.
as I recall Nadal’s master and. H2h advantage reflect his much much better clay results. That’s great and no one disputes that. But Fed has a better overall result.
in the end I tend to think GOAT debates are unsolvable and whatever difference there is between Federer and Nadal is very small. If forced to choose I personally would place Fed ahead for the reasons explained above. But I can see why others would disagree.
Totally disagree. The biggest thing in sports is to be a champion. To win the biggest trophy a sport has to offer. Messi, Kobe, Lebron, Tom Brady, The Big 3 are all champions again and again. That's why we love them.
In the NBA or NFL or MLB or NHL or ATP you can be the best team/individual standings wise (aka number one ranked) all year but lose the "big games" at the end and come away with nothing. This makes being number one great on paper, but not much else. You HAVE to win the big games or matches when they count. Not just be in first place at some random time during the year.
You think being ranked number one in December matters at all? Or March? Or February? It's just math really. A collection of data that spits out a number. It's not sport. Yes, it has value. It shows you've been healthy and consistent. But it's not even close to as important as winning real, big matches or real, big tournaments. Of course, their is usually a correlation between being ranked highly and winning those big games/matches. But the ultimate goal is not to be just be ranked high, but to actually win.
It's ALL about winning the big games. The big matches. At least to me.
That's why it's Novak number one, Rafa number two and Fed number three for me. Novak won the most big tourneys. Rafa the second most. Fed the third most. Full stop. (And I HATE Novak, btw!)
GoatNo1
Legend
no, to be no1, world champion, best in your sport that is what is the most prestigious thing in all sports!
Being number one has nothing to do with being world champion or any champion. It's just being ranked the highest of your peers at a given time based on past performance. Champions must win the biggest tournaments.
Wawrinka is a three time slam champion. But was never ranked number one. Marcelo Rios was ranked number one but was never a champion. Whose career would you rather have?
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
No1 ranking does not necessarily translate into being the best. A guy could end the year as number one even though another guy has won two more slams (as it almost happened with Alcaraz and Djoko that season). Ranking is mostly for the seeds at tournaments and ranking points awarded do not reflect the true importance of the achievements. It would be absurd to assume two slam runner-ups are worth more than a slam win or two masters equal a slam win. However, it would mess up the rankings if they awarded slams the points which would reflect their importance more accurately, so in the end the 2,000 points make sense for the purpose of rankings. That in turn however means, that rankings do not tell the whole story. What matters first and foremost are slams.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
I agree that they are pretty close and that you can find arguments for both. For me it is Nadal since I don’t find Federer’s overall advantages comprehensive enough to make up for a two slam deficit. It is not a slam-dunk though and I can see why others would have Fed ahead.
What I have to say is that I strongly believe that if all three had played under 90s conditions (read under the conditions not in the 90s itself) all three of them would have fewer slams but Fed would have the most. He is clearly the best fast court player of the three so one can maybe make a case that over all surfaces that ever existed he would be the most versatile (Borg having a say as well).
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
I checked it. In the other thread you are basically saying the same as here in the OP and then a couple of posters make fun of you comparing you to Lew so nothing new provided by the thread. The post 183 I also read but not sure what new insights it is supposed to give.
We know about that anomaly of Djoko and Fed being mostly on the same half, but as I have shown above it rarely ended in a scenario where one of them met Nadal in the final after having to play the other. Whether Davydenko would have made such a big difference is questionable as well. I refuse to believe officials rigged draws because they were afraid that Davy could upset Nadal ruining the Fedal final lol.
BTW your chart is wrong as both Davydenko and Nadal also played in AO 2008 and Davydenko was in Nadal’s half there.
Last edited:
GoatNo1
Legend
you picked 3 slams champion and the worst no1 in history. take someone who is YE#1 and compare it to anyone who has never been #1 in history. take someone like gaudio, johansson, orantes, gimeno, paneta, gomez, krajicek, costa, cilic, thiem... and compare with any no1 even rios and what career would he have?
many slam champions were never even close to No.1. rios (6 weeks) is the ONLY no1 who has not won a slam. for YE#1 (if additional conditions regarding participation in mandatory tournaments are met) a trophy and a large cash prize follow. EVERY YE#1 (except rodick) is also a multiple slam champion! there are still many more slam champions than YE#1s. the difference between slam champion and YE#1 is the difference between muzza and wawa even though they both have 3 slams each! that has been 28 #1s, 18 YE#1s and 25 (+ vilas) slam champions after 1973 who never was a #1!
list of all YE#1s
| YE#1 rank | Player | # of YE#1 | # of slams |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Novak Djokovic | 8 | 24 |
| 2 | Pete Sampras | 6 | 14 |
| 3 | Roger Federer | 5 | 20 |
| 4 | Jimmy Connors | 5 | 8 |
| 5 | Rafael Nadal | 5 | 22 |
| 6 | Ivan Lendl | 4 | 8 |
| 7 | John McEnroe | 4 | 7 |
| 8 | Bjorn Borg | 2 | 11 |
| 9 | Lleyton Hewitt | 2 | 2 |
| 10 | Stefan Edberg | 2 | 6 |
| 11 | Andre Agassi | 1 | 8 |
| 12 | Jim Courier | 1 | 4 |
| 13 | Gustavo Kuerten | 1 | 3 |
| 14 | Andy Murray | 1 | 3 |
| 15 | Ilie Nastase | 1 | 2 |
| 16 | Carlos Alcaraz | 1 | 2 |
| 17 | Mats Wilander | 1 | 7 |
| 18 | Andy Roddick | 1 | 1 |
list of slam champion since 1973 (since we have ATP tour and no1) that never won a slam:
Jan Kodeš, Arthur Ashe, Manuel Orantes, Mark Edmondson, Adriano Panatta, Roscoe Tanner, Vitas Gerulaitis, Guillermo Vilas* (he should be no1), Brian Teacher, Johan Kriek, Yannick Noah, Pat Cash, Michael Chang, Andrés Gómez, Michael Stich, Sergi Bruguera, Richard Krajicek, Petr Korda, Goran Ivanišević, Thomas Johansson, Albert Costa, Gastón Gaudio, Juan Martín del Potro, Stan Wawrinka, Marin Čilić, Dominic Thiem
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
?? You mean that never were No.1.
Most of those guys are rated higher than Rios. Guys like Stan, Korda, Goran, Vilas, Chang, Stich, Thiem (and arguably others) are also ahead of Muster. Stan and Vilas are ahead of Kafelnikov, Rafter and Roddick (even if only slightly).
GoatNo1
Legend
yes
vilas should be no1 and we can not count with him. that is many slam champs who did almost nothing beside their slam. every YE#1 has a very respectable career and are ATG or close to it.
History should be corrected and guillermo vilas awarded no.1 | We Are Tennis
In 1974 the season ending men’s championship (now known as the ATP Finals and happening now) was played outdoors for the first time and it was held at the famed Kooyong Tennis Club which used to host the Australian Open. It was the only time the event was played on grass and it was won by a...
wearetennis.bnpparibas
He was referred to as the No.1 player in the world. He pretty much did it all. But did he? Had he? Guillermo Vilas was the greatest player to come from South America but sadly he never got one thing he wanted more than anything. All he wanted was to be recognised as No.1 in the world on the official ATP computer rankings which came into being in August 1973 and which installed Ilie Nastase as the first No.1. He was never ranked beyond No.2.
“Being No.1 is very important,” Mats Wilander, a No.1 himself, said. “The conversation you have in a taxicab or a conversation you have with somebody who asks what you do for a living. ‘I’m a tennis player’. “Oh, you good?’ ‘Yes, I was world No.1’, and they go ‘wow!’
“If you say I was the French Open champion, it’s not the same; it’s not as heavy.”
The week of 22 September 1975, Vilas should have been No.1 for the first time in his life for five weeks and then he should have been No.1 for two weeks in January 1976. Those “empty weeks” were apparently miscalculated.
The evidence was sent to the ATP in December 2014 – 1,232 files highlighting without doubt the inaccuracies. The evidence was rejected. The view was the ATP felt that it could open the flood gates for others to launch claims. But in this case the facts don’t lie. No other player could be in contention for the elite top three spots and no one was likely to squabble if they were 50 but thought they should be 45.
The exact situation had been discovered about Australian legend Evonne Goolagong who was finally installed as a computer ranked No.1 for two weeks in 1976; 31 years after the fact. That issue gave the Vilas camp hope.
...
so australian can but not argentinian!
Last edited:
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Murray, Kuerten, Courier, Roddick, Hewitt, Nastase, Alcaraz (not yet) are no ATGs and only Courier and Murray are really close to it. Of course every YE#1 has a respectable career but let’s face it every YE#1 has also won slams. As a stand-alone achievement though, let’s assume a player would have the choice between winning a slam or becoming YE#1 without winning a slam most would choose the former (at least if we ignore prize money etc).
GoatNo1
Legend
not true. in the upper example wilander sad that no1 is more impressive. muzza offered his carreer for YE#1. nole think thet no1 is biggest achievement. fed sad that he should take YE#1 over another slam. lot of young guys points no1 as most important. sampras offered AO for his last YE#1. most players think that YE#1 is more impressive and greater than a slam.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Murray didn’t “offer” his career that would have been incredibly stupid. Had he known that it could result in a quasi career-ending injury he wouldn’t have done it. Pete, Federer and Novak were all chasing the slam record cannot remember them being similarly enthusiastic about the record of YE#1. Also pundits make a way bigger fuss out of the slam record which is written about all the time than about record of YE#1. Agassi said in his book that he couldn’t care less what a computer says, all which matters would be slams and that Pete was the number 1 in 95 regardless since he won 2 slams to 1. Murray was crying after his Wimbledon 2012 defeat, Fed was crying after AO 09 when it looked like he might not end up breaking Sampras’ slam record. Have you seen any player crying for not reaching YE#1?
Who are those “young guns” and “most players” who value YE#1 higher than slams?
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Agree. Underrated one.
GoatNo1
Legend
federer answered the direct question if he can choos one more slam or no1 again so that it would be the latter. nole recently said that no1 is a bigger undertaking and much more difficult and that after 3 slams this year he is still not as confident as YE#1. raz as well as medvedev and zverev emphasized the importance of number 1 several times and raz tried in every way to end this year as number 1 and he did not hide it! sampras, like Murray, played continuously at the end of the season for his last YE#1 and missed the next AO due to exhaustion. he singles out his 6 YE#1 as his greatest achievement!
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Can you provide the exact quotes?
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
vhs era was epic.. by the end its good to know that brill understood that robert not such a fool as he seemed to be earlier
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Watched it in the theatre in 1999. Was called “public enemy No.1 (Staatsfeind Nummer 1)” in Germany. Also bought it on vhs later.vhs era was epic.. by the end its good to know that brill understood that robert not such a fool as he seemed to be earlier
GoatNo1
Legend
feds answer:
"Uhh I would want to win......To be World Number 1. The feeling of being world number one is unlike any other and I would love to be at the top of the game again"
raz:
“I knew that he was going to recover the No. 1 after U.S. Open,” Alcaraz said Tuesday night after advancing past Dominik Koepfer, 6-3, 3-2, due to walkover because of Koepfer’s ankle injury. “When the tournament is over, I will try to recover as soon as possible. That's my goal. I am working for that.”
“The season has a lot of tournaments until the year is over,” Alcaraz said. “I'll try to recover [No. 1] before the tournament end, before the year end.”
Last edited:
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Well first I meant the quotes with links, second where exactly does anyone here say that YE#1 is more important than slams. They don’t even mention slams.
GoatNo1
Legend
fed answer a direct question if he can choose slam or no1! it was already discussed here:
"Would you rather be YEN1 or win another Slam?" Federer: "To be World #1"
Tennis Stats @TennisStatistic Interesting. Asked if he'd prefer to be year end No1 OR win another Grand Slam, Roger Federer opted for year end No1! Reuters Obviously this was a fan question and the response should not be taken too seriously but he said: *Federer ponders question and...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com
many of players think that no1 is most prestigefull thing just as willander claimed, you have it somewhere in my previous posts. and you can find for lot of players on the net just as i can.
Last edited:
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
There are many posters on this forum who have lost any sense of reality. They think only slam count is enough to consider overall greatness. That's not what ATP thinks and not what I think as well. Just because these members have attention span of 8 weeks in the year, doesn't mean we need to ignore it anymore.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
There are many posters on this board fighting invisible wars and doing nonstop damage control too
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Tennis has always been about only Slams for males since there is a clear distinction between BO5 and BO3 when it comes to Slams and Non Slams.
Anything outside of Slams is only for ranking points which give seeding position for next tournament and prize money, beyond that majority of the crowd dont care for it.
GoatNo1
Legend
well, everything has always been important, but #1 was the top achievement and icing on the tennis player's cake. in Fed's time, slams and weeks always stood out as the biggest records, as he did not have YE#1s, which sampras praised as his greatest achievement. but as nole started breaking all possible records and achieving things unimaginable until then (nole-slam, big titles, masters, h2h, points record, CGSs, GMs) one by one it lost its importance. as it was known that he would take even weeks record, it slowly became insignificant. and since the last bastion of defense (first with Fed and later with Rafa) was the number of slams, then the only thing left was "the only thing that matters" along with, of course, all the more important things, such as the number of fans, popularity, artistic impression and other subjective and invented things that are now the only what are the rest and it's getting louder and louder that in fact they are the only ones that matter!
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
You would not trade 2 slams down or a DCGS. You know I love you but stop lol. Federer SHOULD be ahead but he choked 9373746 matches it is what it is.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Number 1 doesn't matter to rafans because their guy can't keep himself healthy enough.
Nadal15thslam
Hall of Fame
Djokovic fans are hypocrites, trying to say Fed is ahead of Nadal but they are quick to say 24-22 and at least 3 of each slam. Nadal is 2 slams ahead of Fed and has every GS at least twice.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Fed said it in 2014 when he had all the records and was leading the slam race with 17 slams. The YE#1 of Sampras was the only one he was still missing at that point so not sure how much stock to put into it. As for the other quotes, you made those statements so it is on you to provide the links to the quotes. This usual “search it in google yourself” won’t cut it.fed answer a direct question if he can choose slam or no1! it was already discussed here:
"Would you rather be YEN1 or win another Slam?" Federer: "To be World #1"
Tennis Stats @TennisStatistic Interesting. Asked if he'd prefer to be year end No1 OR win another Grand Slam, Roger Federer opted for year end No1! Reuters Obviously this was a fan question and the response should not be taken too seriously but he said: *Federer ponders question and...
many of players think that no1 is most prestigefull thing just as willander claimed, you have it somewhere in my previous posts. and you can find for lot of players on the net just as i can.
SpinWizard
Semi-Pro
Rafa is better than Fed. Novak is better than both Rafa and Roger. Period. Time to move on and accept it.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
What a load of BS. There’s a huge difference between not valuing something and valuing something else even more. #1 is very important, but in the modern era nothing is more important than the schlem record. Let’s take Rios for example. He was number #1 and never won a schlem. Whenever he gets talked about it’s never Rios was #1. It’s always Rios was the only male #1 to never win a schlem. It’s seen as more of a black mark against him. The same thing happened to Wozniacki until she finally won the AO in 2018. Serena famously mocked Safina for being #1 without winning a schlem.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
Fred for example is ahead on 2 out of 3 so this stuff is spinnable pretty well lol
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Taking obscure records mean absolutely nothing. Rios won without winning slam Johansson won a slam without top 5.
Nadal fans have corrupted this board for a decade saying only slams matter and some nolefams and fedfans also joined the bandwagon.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Djokovic is ahead of Nadal in every single criteria. What hypocrites.
Forget 24-22 your guy is behind in every other criteria.
For Fedal, Fed has some arguments and Nadal has some arguments so only using 22-20 is not correct. They are level right now. Djokovic is not competing with them anymore he is ahead in every criteria.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
And all of these are a result of vulturing in the asterisk era, especially in 2023.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Lol it’s not an obscure record, what are you even on about? Rios became #1 without winning on the biggest stage and is only mentioned for not being able to do so. If anything it’s the Bot Brigade who have “corrupted the board” since the majority of them on here are the least informed on tennis history and make up tha vast majority of trolls. We’re not even saying schlems are the only thing that matters. You’re the one putting words in people’s mouths. It’s not just schlems where RAFA leads Ol’ Rog. He has him beat at the Olympics, MS1000s, (Big titles overall which you guys push all the time), H2H, and he has a higher win %. They have the same number of YE#1s. The only thing Ol’ Rog leads in in YECs and weeks @#1. If that’s enough for you to put him ahead so be it. But to say that all we care about is the schlems is just not accurate/honest.
Nadal15thslam
Hall of Fame
Exactly, when Nadal played his last match on tour he was still ahead 22-21.
You make a very good point. Year End number one is much better indicator of greatness than just randomly being ranked number one for a week or two or whatever here or there. I think, when it comes to being ranked number one, year end has much more value than accrued weeks (which includes too many dead zones like December).
But even that is flawed. I don't think anyone in their right mind thinks Lleyton Hewitt (2 year end number ones) is as good as Agassi (1) or equal to Borg (2). Why? THEY WON MORE SLAMS.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
But its not only you who is talking here. Majority of Rafa fans are talking about only slam count. I give Nadal slight lean over Roger right now because of his masters and OG, but that's when we are taking the entirety of records in account. Not just slams.
Bot brigade like you call it is very informed about tennis history. They are not kids anymore and not trolling. The previous notions that Fedal fans kept for years got challenged since rise of Nole and its coping mechanism calling nolefams kids etc. We have now fans of Raz, those might be kids, Nole is 16 years older to him.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
Nadal wasnt kidnapped by aliens lol, he could be in the same place, its only his fault and nobody else that he played last match that moment you said
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
These trumpster like fans want to stop the count as soon as their guy is losing.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
The schlem count is the most important thing that doesn’t mean it’s the only thing we care about. There’s other areas that RAFA has him beat but the first most important aspect is the schlem count. Dude I literally had to correct one of your fellow Joker fans that the USO wasn’t even played on HC until 1978 when they were listing off players who supposedly had more HC GS titles than RAFA. You the other day said that 05 RAFA’s FH wasn’t great. It’s not even close at the moment which fanbase has the most trolls.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Its not trolling if its true.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Career Inflation Era mate lol. Nadal is the second biggest beneficiary of this era.
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Lol it is trolling. There’s a reason you were being ridiculed by multiple people from different fanbases. There’s a reason trolls like Lew and @LaVie en Rose got banned.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Not all Djokovic fans are saying that. I had Nadal as GOAT after AO 2022, for a full year. Which means in my eyes he has permanently gone past Federer.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
It doesn't work that way. The tournament he played his last match in concluded with Djokovic equalling the slam record. You can't count it, that just because he lost before Djokovic won the title, he was ahead.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Some people love to call out trolls in other fanbases but don't have much to say about the trolls in their own fanbase. If most of the trolls are now Djokovic fans then that's because the Nadal trolls ran away with their tail between their legs after the turn of events in 2023, and after being unbearable last year. Lol. Too much tribal thinking on this board and thinking their fanbase is better when each of the big 3 have plenty of trolls to go around.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
