GS Titles by age (at Year's End for Big 3)

[beard]

There is similar topic about Big Titles, but lets see about GS titles (hope I haven't made mistake). We can notice what we already knew:
- Nadal had best start
- Federer catches him at 26 years old
- Nadal catches Federer at 32 years old
- Novak is bellow almost all time but is closing to rivals, and if he get two more this year everyone will be on 17 slams at 32 years old (CYGS could put Novak ahead)
- At 29-30 years old all tree stagnated
- At 31 years old Federer stopped winning slams for few years, but Nadal and Djokovic didn't

https://imgur.com/vEOiR11

 

[jm1980]

Why couldn't the blue line stay flat?

 

[Yugram]

Why couldn't the blue line stay flat?

Would’ve been perfect
#NadalovicUnited

 

[beard]

Never mind, this way it will be even sweeter when green line catch blue one

 

[BeatlesFan]

Why couldn't the blue line stay flat?

Why should it matter? Djokovic fans have started 110 threads proclaiming him GOAT because he has all the Masters 1000's and a winning H2H against Fed and Nadal. What Fed has done (or will do) should be utterly irrelevant since Nole is already GOAT and BOAT. Fraud's a mug from a weak era and isn't even tennis-relevant, remember?

 

[jm1980]

Why should it matter? Djokovic fans have started 110 threads proclaiming him GOAT because he has all the Masters 1000's and a winning H2H against Fed and Nadal. What Fed has done (or will do) should be utterly irrelevant since Nole is already GOAT and BOAT. Fraud's a mug from a weak era and isn't even tennis-relevant, remember?

I see no Djokovic fans making serious GOAT claims based on M1000 and H2H

 

[Nadalgaenger]

There is similar topic about Big Titles, but lets see about GS titles (hope I haven't made mistake). We can notice what we already knew:
- Nadal had best start
- Federer catches him at 26 years old
- Nadal catches Federer at 32 years old
- Novak is bellow almost all time but is closing to rivals, and if he get two more this year everyone will be on 17 slams at 32 years old (CYGS could put Novak ahead)
- At 29-30 years old all tree stagnated
- At 31 years old Federer stopped winning slams for few years, but Nadal and Djokovic didn't

https://imgur.com/vEOiR11

Good Poast.

My thoughts: Whether Fed is caught by Nadal or Djokovic will depend on two things:
1) Fed's ability to win any more titles (he may well need 1-2 more).
2) The #NextGen's ability to emerge as a barrier.

For all of the hate that guys like Zverev, Thiem, and Kyrgios get on here, they may be the safeguards of Roger's record. If they don't stop Djokodal in the next 3-4 years, I think Fed's record is in serious danger.

 

[itrium84]

Why should it matter? Djokovic fans have started 110 threads proclaiming him GOAT because he has all the Masters 1000's and a winning H2H against Fed and Nadal. What Fed has done (or will do) should be utterly irrelevant since Nole is already GOAT and BOAT. Fraud's a mug from a weak era and isn't even tennis-relevant, remember?

It's my impression that other fanbases slowly start to recognize Djokovic as BOAT, too.
This overhype about Novak last few months is understandable, and yeah, there are few percentages of his louder fans that unjustifiedly proclaimed him as GOAT, trying to make Fed's achievements smaller than they are. I don't like that, but it is as it is.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

 

[TMF]

- At 31 years old Federer stopped winning slams for few years, but Nadal and Djokovic didn't

Testament of Federer had much tougher competition than Djokodal at 31. Federer had to deal with prime/peak Djokodal and Murray. OTOH, Djokodal have old Federer, Murray in declined/injured, and atrocious NextGen.

 

[Sport]

It's my impression that other fanbases slowly start to recognize Djokovic as BOAT, too.

Based on what? Did you do a poll asking non-Djokovic fans whether Djokovic is the BOAT? No poll, no credibility to your claim that "other fanbases are recogninzing Djokovic as the BOAT". Anyhow, the opinion of the majority is not an indicative of truth, since time can prove popular opinions to be wrong. The say that the opinion of the majority is an indicative of truth is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as argumentum ad populum. Most people in the X century believed that the planet Earth was flat. Does it mean that the planet Earth was flat in the X century? Most scientists in the XIX century still were skeptic about the existence of atoms. Does it mean atoms did not exist in the XIX century?

If anything, Nadal is the BOAT. Nadal leads the H2H in Grand Slams over both Federer and Djokovic. In effect, Nadal leads the H2H over Federer 9-3 in Grand Slams (including 3-1 at the Australian Open) and 9-6 over Djokovic (including 2-1 at the US Open). Nadal is the only man able to defeat prime Federer in a Grand Slam match on grass (Wimbledon 2008) and prime Djokovic in a Grand Slam match on hard courts (US Open 2013). Neither Federer nor Djokovic have ever defeated prime Nadal in a Grand Slam match on clay. In addition, Nadal has won at least 2 Grand Slams on each surface (hard, grass and clay), while Djokovic only has 1 Grand Slam on clay. It is true that there are 2 Grand Slams on ahrd courts, but 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Nadal averages 2 titles per Grand Slam on hard courts while Djokovic only averages 1 title per Grand Slam on clay. 2 >>1. Nadal is more complete than Djokovic in outdoor surfaces and more dominant in important matches since he leads the H2H over his main rivals in Grand Slam matches.

 

[SecondToNone]

Djokodal have old Federer, Murray in declined/injured, and atrocious NextGen.

They have each other, which is more than enough. Arguably greatest rivalry of all time.

 

[Zhilady]

Nadal’s best season (or 12-month period) pales in comparison to Federer’s and Djokovic’s best seasons. He’s not in that conversation, no matter how hard you cherry-pick your criteria.

 

[Sport]

Nadal’s best season (or 12-month period) pales in comparison to Federer’s and Djokovic’s best seasons. He’s not in that conversation, no matter how hard you cherry-pick your criteria.

Nadal is the only man in tennis history able to win 3 Grand Slam on 3 different surfaces (hard, grass and clay) the same calendar year (2010). Total domination of the 3 surfaces in a calendar year, something nobody has ever done. No matter how hard you try to dismiss it, only Nadal has achieved it.

 

[helterskelter]

Based on what? Did you do a poll asking non-Djokovic fans whether Djokovic is the BOAT? No poll, no credibility to your claim that "other fanbases are recogninzing Djokovic as the BOAT". Anyhow, the opinion of the majority is not an indicative of truth, since time can prove popular opinions to be wrong. The say that the opinion of the majority is an indicative of truth is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as argumentum ad populum. Most people in the X century believed that the planet Earth was flat. Does it mean that the planet Earth was flat in the X century? Most scientists in the XIX century still were skeptic about the existence of atoms. Does it mean atoms did not exist in the XIX century?

If anything, Nadal is the BOAT. Nadal leads the H2H in Grand Slams over both Federer and Djokovic. In effect, Nadal leads the H2H over Federer 9-3 in Grand Slams (including 3-1 at the Australian Open) and 9-6 over Djokovic (including 2-1 at the US Open). Nadal is the only man able to defeat prime Federer in a Grand Slam match on grass (Wimbledon 2008) and prime Djokovic in a Grand Slam match on hard courts (US Open 2013). Neither Federer nor Djokovic have ever defeated prime Nadal in a Grand Slam match on clay. In addition, Nadal has won at least 2 Grand Slams on each surface (hard, grass and clay), while Djokovic only has 1 Grand Slam on clay. It is true that there are 2 Grand Slams on ahrd courts, but 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Nadal averages 2 titles per Grand Slam on hard courts while Djokovic only averages 1 title per Grand Slam on clay. 2 >>1. Nadal is more complete than Djokovic in outdoor surfaces and more dominant in important matches since he leads the H2H over his main rivals in Grand Slam matches.

Another good example would be that most people believe that Bull has lost many tennis matches in his time, but those who know the truth understand that he is morally unbeaten and morally unbeatable.

(On a serious note, one difference between the cases is that there is a right answer to the question of the shape of the Earth, whereas there is no right answer to the question of who is goat or boat because it is not an empirical question).

 

[Zhilady]

Nadal is the only man in tennis history able to win 3 Grand Slam on 3 different surfaces (hard, grass and clay) the same calendar year (2010). Total domination of the 3 surfaces in a calendar year, something nobody has ever done. No matter how hard you try to dismiss it, only Nadal has achieved it.

Doesn’t matter. Nadal’s best 12-month stretch pales in comparison to Federer’s and Djokovic’s best 12-month stretches.

And it’s laughable to suggest Nadal had “total domination” over hardcourts in 2010. Federer was better on hardcourts that year.

 

[Yugram]

Good Poast.

My thoughts: Whether Fed is caught by Nadal or Djokovic will depend on two things:
1) Fed's ability to win any more titles (he may well need 1-2 more).
2) The #NextGen's ability to emerge as a barrier.

For all of the hate that guys like Zverev, Thiem, and Kyrgios get on here, they may be the safeguards of Roger's record. If they don't stop Djokodal in the next 3-4 years, I think Fed's record is in serious danger.

It’s not even a 3-4 years question. With 7 slams to come till the end of 2020, at least one of Big2 should be 1 off, or equal.

 

[AceSalvo]

Now this makes sense.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Good Poast.

My thoughts: Whether Fed is caught by Nadal or Djokovic will depend on two things:
1) Fed's ability to win any more titles (he may well need 1-2 more).
2) The #NextGen's ability to emerge as a barrier.

For all of the hate that guys like Zverev, Thiem, and Kyrgios get on here, they may be the safeguards of Roger's record. If they don't stop Djokodal in the next 3-4 years, I think Fed's record is in serious danger.

So, Djokovic and Nadal need to not have ANY resistance from the next generations in order to catch Feddie boy?

That is like the time of three "weak eras", man!

 

[uscwang]

There is similar topic about Big Titles, but lets see about GS titles (hope I haven't made mistake). We can notice what we already knew:
- Nadal had best start
- Federer catches him at 26 years old
- Nadal catches Federer at 32 years old
- Novak is bellow almost all time but is closing to rivals, and if he get two more this year everyone will be on 17 slams at 32 years old (CYGS could put Novak ahead)
- At 29-30 years old all tree stagnated
- At 31 years old Federer stopped winning slams for few years, but Nadal and Djokovic didn't

https://imgur.com/vEOiR11

I'll be surprised if more than 2 GS separate any two of the Big 3 by the end.
I expect the spread to be 18-20, 19-21, or 20-22 or closer.

 

[mike danny]

They have each other, which is more than enough. Arguably greatest rivalry of all time.

Current Nadal is easier competition for Djokovic now than a younger ATG would be.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

They have each other, which is more than enough. Arguably greatest rivalry of all time.

How many Majors have they directly taken from each other?

How many from Federer?

ROFL

 

[tudwell]

Nadal is the only man in tennis history able to win 3 Grand Slam on 3 different surfaces (hard, grass and clay) the same calendar year (2010). Total domination of the 3 surfaces in a calendar year, something nobody has ever done. No matter how hard you try to dismiss it, only Nadal has achieved it.

It's an incredible achievement, but you're not doing yourself any favors saying Nadal had "total domination" of hard courts that year. He won two titles, failing to win all 5 Masters he played, the WTF, and the Australian Open. He won 1 big hard court title all year.

 

[NoleFam]

Current Nadal is easier competition for Djokovic now than a younger ATG would be.

Current Nadal would have 19 Slams right now if Djokovic was out of the picture so no.

 

[Third Serve]

There is similar topic about Big Titles, but lets see about GS titles (hope I haven't made mistake). We can notice what we already knew:
- Nadal had best start
- Federer catches him at 26 years old
- Nadal catches Federer at 32 years old
- Novak is bellow almost all time but is closing to rivals, and if he get two more this year everyone will be on 17 slams at 32 years old (CYGS could put Novak ahead)
- At 29-30 years old all tree stagnated
- At 31 years old Federer stopped winning slams for few years, but Nadal and Djokovic didn't

https://imgur.com/vEOiR11

I like how this post doesn't praise any specific player. It just comments on the statistic and just the statistic. Could be a good discussion. The slam and masters should be kept separate like this. It allows for more objectivity

 

[mike danny]

Current Nadal would have 19 Slams right now if Djokovic was out of the picture so no.

So? Old Fed would have 24 slams without Novak in the last 5-6 years. His younger version would still be better.

 

[Third Serve]

Nadal is the only man in tennis history able to win 3 Grand Slam on 3 different surfaces (hard, grass and clay) the same calendar year (2010). Total domination of the 3 surfaces in a calendar year, something nobody has ever done. No matter how hard you try to dismiss it, only Nadal has achieved it.

It wasn't exactly total domination. He lost a lot to players he shouldn't have been losing to in events like Indian Wells, Miami, Canada, Cincinnati, and Shanghai. Besides, Federer was very close to him in terms of hard court level throughout the year.

 

[NoleFam]

So? Old Fed would have 24 slams without Novak in the last 5-6 years. His younger version would still be better.

I could cherry pick as well and go back 5-6 years and say Novak should be at least at 18 Slams right now but it's useless. I'm talking about the now and Djokovic has beaten Nadal in 2 of the last 3 Slams. If Djokovic didn't stop him he'd be at 19 now. So to try to dismiss Nadal as weak competition now when it suits you seems like just another way to find an excuse for Djokovic's wins.

 

[itrium84]

Based on what? Did you do a poll asking non-Djokovic fans whether Djokovic is the BOAT? No poll, no credibility to your claim that "other fanbases are recogninzing Djokovic as the BOAT". Anyhow, the opinion of the majority is not an indicative of truth, since time can prove popular opinions to be wrong. The say that the opinion of the majority is an indicative of truth is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as argumentum ad populum. Most people in the X century believed that the planet Earth was flat. Does it mean that the planet Earth was flat in the X century? Most scientists in the XIX century still were skeptic about the existence of atoms. Does it mean atoms did not exist in the XIX century?

If anything, Nadal is the BOAT. Nadal leads the H2H in Grand Slams over both Federer and Djokovic. In effect, Nadal leads the H2H over Federer 9-3 in Grand Slams (including 3-1 at the Australian Open) and 9-6 over Djokovic (including 2-1 at the US Open). Nadal is the only man able to defeat prime Federer in a Grand Slam match on grass (Wimbledon 2008) and prime Djokovic in a Grand Slam match on hard courts (US Open 2013). Neither Federer nor Djokovic have ever defeated prime Nadal in a Grand Slam match on clay. In addition, Nadal has won at least 2 Grand Slams on each surface (hard, grass and clay), while Djokovic only has 1 Grand Slam on clay. It is true that there are 2 Grand Slams on ahrd courts, but 4 ÷ 2 = 2. Nadal averages 2 titles per Grand Slam on hard courts while Djokovic only averages 1 title per Grand Slam on clay. 2 >>1. Nadal is more complete than Djokovic in outdoor surfaces and more dominant in important matches since he leads the H2H over his main rivals in Grand Slam matches.

Based on my subjective perception - I literally stated "It's my impression". Never claimed any objectivity to that claim. You've just put a big effort to attack a strawman. Swinged at me and missed. You can keep hitting that strawman you created, I don't mind.

You paraphrased my claim, changing it's meaning, while pretending it's a citation. I never said "other fanbases are recogninzing Djokovic as the BOAT". Another strawman. Another swing. Another miss.

About popular opinion not equaling objective truth - You act like I was claiming otherwise. I didn't. One more strawman. One more swing. One more miss.
I know what's Ad Populum, no need to educate me on this, it can be seen as condescending and arrogant from your side, which would make your argument contaminated with Ad Hominem fallacy.
Career Grand Slam h2h is nowhere near to a BOAT criteria. It's barely second tier GOAT criteria.
Basically all further criterias you mantioned here have nothing to do with BOAT definition.
Don't get me wrong, it's amazing stuff, great career achievements that make Nadal one of greatest players in tennis history - but not BOAT stuff.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

 

[tennis_pro]

- At 31 years old Federer stopped winning slams for few years, but Nadal and Djokovic didn't

That tends to happen when you have competition.

 

[Zhilady]

I could cherry pick as well and go back 5-6 years and say Novak should be at least at 18 Slams right now but it's useless. I'm talking about the now and Djokovic has beaten Nadal in 2 of the last 3 Slams. If Djokovic didn't stop him he'd be at 19 now. So to try to dismiss Nadal as weak competition now when it suits you seems like just another way to find an excuse for Djokovic's wins.

I think “weak competition” is always a stupid argument, but your argument is just as ridiculous. No matter the competition, if you don’t win, someone else will. Because someone else won doesn’t make your competition stronger, because your competition will win what you don’t win anyway, whether it’s weak or strong.

 

[mike danny]

I could cherry pick as well and go back 5-6 years and say Novak should be at least at 18 Slams right now but it's useless. I'm talking about the now and Djokovic has beaten Nadal in 2 of the last 3 Slams. If Djokovic didn't stop him he'd be at 19 now. So to try to dismiss Nadal as weak competition now when it suits you seems like just another way to find an excuse for Djokovic's wins.

I am just saying that Nadal right now is not extremely tough competition just because his name is Nadal. Him being Novak's age helps Novak, it doesn't hinder him.

 

[NoleFam]

I think “weak competition” is always a stupid argument, but your argument is just as ridiculous. No matter the competition, if you don’t win, someone else will. Because someone else won doesn’t make your competition stronger, because your competition will win what you don’t win anyway, whether it’s weak or strong.

Nadal was #1 in the world at Wimbledon, had won the last 3/5 Slams, played his best Wimbledon in years and it took Djokovic 10-8 in the 5th to beat him but yea Nadal was easier competition for Djokovic, who hadn't won a title in over two years. What you are talking about is off topic since Nadal was the best player in the world when Djokovic won there.

 

[ABCD]

Why should it matter? Djokovic fans have started 110 threads proclaiming him GOAT because he has all the Masters 1000's and a winning H2H against Fed and Nadal. What Fed has done (or will do) should be utterly irrelevant since Nole is already GOAT and BOAT. Fraud's a mug from a weak era and isn't even tennis-relevant, remember?

Federer is not a mug, but among top 5 players ever. For the rest what you said I can't fault you. It took some time, but you have seen the light finally. I am glad to see that even such brainwashed fanatic can find inner strength to see the truth.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

 

[NoleFam]

I am just saying that Nadal right now is not extremely tough competition just because his name is Nadal. Him being Novak's age helps Novak, it doesn't hinder him.

I have no idea how you arrived to this conclusion and how you arrived to much of what you are posting today.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I have no idea how you arrived to this conclusion and how you arrived to much of what you are posting today.

He had his peak earlier in his career.

You are welcome.

 

[Zhilady]

Nadal was #1 in the world at Wimbledon, had won the last 3/5 Slams, played his best Wimbledon in years and it took Djokovic 10-8 in the 5th to beat him but yea Nadal was easier competition for Djokovic, who hadn't won a title in over two years. What you are talking about is off topic since Nadal was the best player in the world when Djokovic won there.

Which goes back to what I was saying. If you’re not #1, someone else will be, for better or worse. If you’re not winning Slams, someone else will, for better or worse. Still doesn’t mean very much.

Tennis is a zero sum game. Any argument to whether someone was tough competition or weak competition will be a circular argument.

 

[upchuck]

Current Nadal is easier competition for Djokovic now than a younger ATG would be.

How can you say this? Nadal and Djokovic are basically the same age. If the assumption is that Nadal must have declined because he's aged, then that assumption must apply to Djokovic as well, evening things out.

 

[upchuck]

What's the smart, cute take on why age 30 was such an unproductive year for the Big 3?

 

[beard]

I like how this post doesn't praise any specific player. It just comments on the statistic and just the statistic. Could be a good discussion. The slam and masters should be kept separate like this. It allows for more objectivity

Thanks

 

[beard]

Anyway, Fed fans complaining about weak competition make me smile everytime.
Ahhh, I remember those "one can play those in front him" days
Novak deserved easy days and I hope it will last for long time.
I am sorry poor Rafa probably wont have that luxury...

 

[Nadalgaenger]

So, Djokovic and Nadal need to not have ANY resistance from the next generations in order to catch Feddie boy?

That is like the time of three "weak eras", man!

No, the issue is that the 3 greatest players of all time had to play against each other and limit each other's slams. It's like the separation of powers in the US govt! Without the checks and balances system, tennis would have suffered from a decade long tyranny (at least by Fed or Nole). Nadal's problems on HC and grass go deeper than Fed and Nole's (as he has lost at slams to all kinds of random guys on those surfaces this decade).
Fed would probably be at 24-25 slams without Nole and Nole would be at 18-19 counting without Fed.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

No, the issue is that the 3 greatest players of all time had to play against each other and limit each other's slams. It's like the separation of powers in the US govt! Without the checks and balances system, tennis would have suffered from a decade long tyranny (at least by Fed or Nole). Nadal's problems on HC and grass go deeper than Fed and Nole's (as he has lost at slams to all kinds of random guys on those surfaces this decade).
Fed would probably be at 24-25 slams without Nole and Nole would be at 18-19 counting without Fed.

I don't think that you have quite calculated the "checks and balances" between these three.

If you did you would see that Federer is in significant disadvantage in the comparison between them.

He catched Nadal's peak, when it was his best chance to win on clay, and Djokovic's peaks, when it was his best chance to compensate for the lost opportunities on clay by winning elsewere.

Nadal cached only part of Federer's peak on grass and hard, and had a chance to escape with several titles on his most problematic surface before Djokovic entering his and also win a title on HC. He wasn't challenged at all by anyone in his peak on clay.

Djokovic entered his peak on grass when Federer was basically a goner on the surface and basically has himself to blame that he slipped once there, and the same goes for HC and clay.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

I don't think that you have quite calculated the "checks and balances" between these three.

If you did you would see that Federer is in significant disadvantage in the comparison between them.

He catched Nadal's peak, when it was his best chance to win on clay, and Djokovic's peaks, when it was his best chance to compensate for the lost opportunities on clay by winning elsewere.

Nadal cached only part of Federer's peak on grass and hard, and had a chance to escape with several titles on his most problematic surface before Djokovic entering his and also win a title on HC. He wasn't challenged at all by anyone in his peak on clay.

Djokovic entered his peak on grass when Federer was basically a goner on the surface and basically has himself to blame that he slipped once there, and the same goes for HC and clay.

Fed and Djokovic were both formidable challenges to Nadal on clay, but just not good enough on those surfaces. In most eras, both of them would have 3-4 FO.

 

[chjtennis]

Testament of Federer had much tougher competition than Djokodal at 31. Federer had to deal with prime/peak Djokodal and Murray. OTOH, Djokodal have old Federer, Murray in declined/injured, and atrocious NextGen.

This is actually a very important fact we have take into account. Federer had Nadal and Djokovic to compete with but Nadal and Djokovic have no one who's younger and has the ability of their caliber. That's a huge advantage. They should dominate Federer, who is 5-6 years senior, during late part of their career. The thing is, Nadal and Djokovic don't have any real young threats who could catch them.

 

[abmk]

How can you say this? Nadal and Djokovic are basically the same age. If the assumption is that Nadal must have declined because he's aged, then that assumption must apply to Djokovic as well, evening things out.

Yes and in this la la Land, 2+7 equals 10000, doesn't it ?

Meanwhile in the land of reality (where you don't live), Nadal started winning slams much earlier than Djokovic (05 RG to 08 AO), has clearly more miles on his body, has a more grinding style and has physically declined significantly more.

 

[upchuck]

Yes and in this la la Land, 2+7 equals 10000, doesn't it ?

Meanwhile in the land of reality (where you don't live), Nadal started winning slams much earlier than Djokovic (05 RG to 08 AO), has clearly more miles on his body, has a more grinding style and has physically declined significantly more.

More grinding style? I've seen stats showing Djokovic running more miles per tournament than Nadal.

 

[abmk]

More grinding style? I've seen stats showing Djokovic running more miles per tournament than Nadal.

Link to atleast 2 of them.

 

[mike danny]

How can you say this? Nadal and Djokovic are basically the same age. If the assumption is that Nadal must have declined because he's aged, then that assumption must apply to Djokovic as well, evening things out.

My point exactly. So if Nadal can't expose Novak's decline, he isn't tougher competition than a younger ATG would be.

Federer in 2011-2012 would have loved to face 30's Nadal instead of the younger one.

 

[mike danny]

I have no idea how you arrived to this conclusion and how you arrived to much of what you are posting today.

If Nadal were younger, Novak would have more trouble against him.

Do I really have to spell it out?

Nadal being the same age as Novak helped Novak win their Wimb semi last year for example.