How can Nadal dominate one surface and become GOAT?

S

Shady_Sawyer

Rookie
Even if Nadal gets to 18 slams he has only truly dominated clay. Whereas Federer has dominated grass and hard courts. How can dominating one surface be considered superior to dominating 2 surfaces? Besides how can the GOAT be dominated by his opponent like in 2011 for a whole year? How can he be GOAT while staying at no.2 from 2005 to 2008. The longest no.2 in history. How can the GOAT not win an indoor WTF? I can keep going...
 
24293063.jpg
 
OP: "Damn, that was an impressive win just now..... ugggggh :mad: he might actually win this thing :shock: How can I do some quick damage control?"
 
Shady_Sawyer said:
Even if Nadal gets to 18 slams he has only truly dominated clay. Whereas Federer has dominated grass and hard courts. How can dominating one surface be considered superior to dominating 2 surfaces? Besides how can the GOAT be dominated by his opponent like in 2011 for a whole year? How can he be GOAT while staying at no.2 from 2005 to 2008. The longest no.2 in history. How can the GOAT not win an indoor WTF? I can keep going...
Click to expand...


OF COURST NOT, I wish posters here would do a little study. Nadal is probably the greatest super slow court player even, ALL COURTS ARE SLOW! But put him into ALL TIME, that is 90's, 80's, you'd never hear of him. He's a SLOW COURT PLAYER. Federer on the other hand had to adjust to slow courts, and has succeeded, Fed would win in the past and today, THAT is the factor that makes him the greatest of ALL TIME, not just this era.

Look at Nadal struggling like crazy against Rosol, while Wimby is slow, Rosol hits hard, that combination likens the conditions to all other time grass, Nadal couldn't get to it, Nadal would hit, his ball bounce fast and Rosol, ready would deflect for a winner.

This is NO KNOCK on Nadal, so save your attacks, it's just fact. The reason we have a "Big Four" is because they are all great, and boring baseliners in the best shape, exception Fed who got screwed, trained on fast courts to be a serve and volleyer only to have the courts slowed down.
 
how can the 'GOAT' not when multiple slams on every surface?

LOL…

Fedephants are getting more desperate by the day!
 
Makes it even more amazing. Nadal doesn't get 2 cracks at clay slams all year like guys like Nole and Fed get at hardcourt slams.

Imagine if two slams a year were played on clay and not hards.

Nonetheless, Nadal has PLENTY of accomplishments across all surfaces. So the point is rendered moot.
 
MichaelNadal said:
OP: "Damn, that was an impressive win just now..... ugggggh :mad: he might actually win this thing :shock: How can I do some quick damage control?"
Click to expand...

Can you just imagine if/(when?!?) Rafa gets to 18, the level of butthurt that will be witnessed at this place?

And to answer the OP, Rafa will be the GOAT because he DOMINATES his main opposition, 3 all time great players in a golden era, Federer, Djokovic, and Murray 25 to 7 in grand slams. TWENTY FIVE to 7. He is 11-0 at Roland Garros against them which is awe-inspiring in addition to his 9 titles.

But that means he STILL leads them 14 to 7 OFF clay in grand slam! 2 to 1 in slams in the semis or finals against the elite rivals on grass and hardcourt.

He figures everyone out on the big stages. He is the best big match player ever and the best problem solver men's tennis has ever seen. He's not the GOAT yet, but he's getting damn close and it's a joy to watch! The haters butthurt make it even more enjoyable :)
 
125downthemiddle said:
Can you just imagine if/(when?!?) Rafa gets to 18, the level of butthurt that will be witnessed at this place?

And to answer the OP, Rafa will be the GOAT because he DOMINATES his main opposition, 3 all time great players in a golden era, Federer, Djokovic, and Murray 25 to 7 in grand slams. TWENTY FIVE to 7. He is 11-0 at Roland Garros against them which is awe-inspiring in addition to his 9 titles.

But that means he STILL leads them 14 to 7 OFF clay in grand slam! 2 to 1 in slams in the semis or finals against the elite rivals on grass and hardcourt.

He figures everyone out on the big stages. He is the best big match player ever and the best problem solver men's tennis has ever seen. He's not the GOAT yet, but he's getting damn close and it's a joy to watch! The haters butthurt make it even more enjoyable :)
Click to expand...

hahaha//don't make Shadysawyer cry even more............:cry:
 
90's Clay said:
Makes it even more amazing. Nadal doesn't get 2 cracks at clay slams all year like guys like Nole and Fed get at hardcourt slams.

Imagine if two slams a year were played on clay and not hards.

Nonetheless, Nadal has PLENTY of accomplishments across all surfaces. So the point is rendered moot.
Click to expand...

Nobody's denying that. It's just that it's far from GOATworthy.

He's got 5 majors COMBINED at the AO, Wimbledon and US and not more than 2 in any of them. Even without the FO he's one of the all time greats but you can't say that these are GOAT numbers with a straight face.
 
Shady_Sawyer said:
Even if Nadal gets to 18 slams he has only truly dominated clay. Whereas Federer has dominated grass and hard courts. How can dominating one surface be considered superior to dominating 2 surfaces? Besides how can the GOAT be dominated by his opponent like in 2011 for a whole year? How can he be GOAT while staying at no.2 from 2005 to 2008. The longest no.2 in history. How can the GOAT not win an indoor WTF? I can keep going...
Click to expand...

Don't worry, there is no GOAT. There has never been. And there will never be.

There have been many great Players in the Tennis history. Federer and Nadal are just two of them.
 
tennis_pro said:
Nobody's denying that. It's just that it's far from GOATworthy.

He's got 5 majors COMBINED at the AO, Wimbledon and US and not more than 2 in any of them. Even without the FO he's one of the all time greats but you can't say that these are GOAT numbers with a straight face.
Click to expand...

adc-know-your-goat.gif
 
SublimeTennis said:
I see, you don't have the intelligence to actually address what I say so you result to calling me a "Troll". Call me what you like, but if you don't want to look so stupid actually try to address what I said, I doubt you have the mental capacity to do so.
Click to expand...

45728624.jpg
 
tennis_pro said:
Nobody's denying that. It's just that it's far from GOATworthy.

He's got 5 majors COMBINED at the AO, Wimbledon and US and not more than 2 in any of them. Even without the FO he's one of the all time greats but you can't say that these are GOAT numbers with a straight face.
Click to expand...

There is no universal, according to Hoyle definition of GOAT or GOATworthy. Although, I wish there were, as it would mean the end of discussions like this.

You might not think it's GOATworthy to have "only" 5 majors off of clay. Someone else might not think it's GOATworthy to have "only" 1 French Open.

Folks can look at the same set of data and come up with a different opinion because, well, at the end of the day, which player is the GOAT is just that, an opinion.
 
SublimeTennis said:
OF COURST NOT, I wish posters here would do a little study. Nadal is probably the greatest super slow court player even, ALL COURTS ARE SLOW! But put him into ALL TIME, that is 90's, 80's, you'd never hear of him. He's a SLOW COURT PLAYER. Federer on the other hand had to adjust to slow courts, and has succeeded, Fed would win in the past and today, THAT is the factor that makes him the greatest of ALL TIME, not just this era.

Look at Nadal struggling like crazy against Rosol, while Wimby is slow, Rosol hits hard, that combination likens the conditions to all other time grass, Nadal couldn't get to it, Nadal would hit, his ball bounce fast and Rosol, ready would deflect for a winner.

This is NO KNOCK on Nadal, so save your attacks, it's just fact. The reason we have a "Big Four" is because they are all great, and boring baseliners in the best shape, exception Fed who got screwed, trained on fast courts to be a serve and volleyer only to have the courts slowed down.
Click to expand...

Sorry but you make the assumption that Rafa would play the same way if most courts were faster and that's just speculative. Fed found ALL his success on slower courts, as has Rafa. They are a product of their eras. It's not a fact, it's your opinion, sorry.This is idea that Novak and Nadal couldn't play on faster courts but Fed would be just fine is hilarious. They'd all have to make adjustments.
 
Rafa is not the GOAT but Fed certainly is not either. Get over such a meaningless distinction and just enjoy tennis. So what if Rafa has owned Fed? They are both great.
 
He is contention because of the majors he has won. He has won on all 4 surfaces so how can you hold it against him to have a best surface.
 
Fiji said:
That's a big hole he has going on. Federer, Sampras and Borg dominated at more than one slam.
Click to expand...

Don't think it'll matter at all, as I expect he'll end up with a nice spread of non-clay slams. Another Wimbledon seems possible, and another Australian and US Open as well.

3 Wimbys, 3 US Opens and 2 Australians would be a very, very good look.

He'll have dominated a single slam more than anyone else ever has, be at least Becker-level as a Wimbledon champ, become a hardcourt legend and do the career grand slam twice.

If he manages to achieve that, anyone still whining about his not dominating a second slam will come off like bitter villiage idiot. No one will buy whatever they are selling.
 
BringBackSV said:
Sorry but you make the assumption that Rafa would play the same way if most courts were faster and that's just speculative. Fed found ALL his success on slower courts, as has Rafa. They are a product of their eras. It's not a fact, it's your opinion, sorry.This is idea that Novak and Nadal couldn't play on faster courts but Fed would be just fine is hilarious. They'd all have to make adjustments.
Click to expand...
Well I saw what Federer did to Novak at Cincinatti on a faster court, which tells me Federer is indeed a much better fast court player than Djokovic
 
If he reaches 17 slams, he is Open Era GOAT for sure.

At that point he will be far above Sampras and Borg, and also greater than Federer due to the H2H.
 
mike danny said:
Well I saw what Federer did to Novak at Cincinatti on a faster court, which tells me Federer is indeed a much better fast court player than Djokovic
Click to expand...

This is one match, how can you make general conclusions from it? And Federer destroyed Djokovic in only one set, the second one finifshed 7-6. Surely every tennis player even the best ones have some drops like that. Not to mention the fact that was after the Olympics and Federer skipped Canada while Djokovic won it and reached the final in Cincinnati.
 
Bukmeikara said:
This is one match, how can you make general conclusions from it? And Federer destroyed Djokovic in only one set, the second one finifshed 7-6. Surely every tennis player even the best ones have some drops like that. Not to mention the fact that was after the Olympics and Federer skipped Canada while Djokovic won it and reached the final in Cincinnati.
Click to expand...
Well both their Cincinatii matches had those type of scores. The first had a breadstick and the second had a bagel. Come on... It is pretty clear that in-form Federer has a clear edge over Novak on fast HC. How come Novak hasn't won a set in 4 Cincy finals, while Fed already has 5 titles at Cincy? Novak simply isn't as good on fast HC as he is on slow ones.
 
mike danny said:
Well both their Cincinatii matches had those type of scores. The first had a breadstick and the second had a bagel. Come on... It is pretty clear that in-form Federer has a clear edge over Novak on fast HC. How come Novak hasn't won a set in 4 Cincy finals, while Fed already has 5 titles at Cincy? Novak simply isn't as good on fast HC as he is on slow ones.
Click to expand...

the main reason why Federer is better on faster surfaces, is that he has a great serve. and he strikes the ball very early.

what i am trying to say is that Federer is the greatest offensive baseliner the sport has ever witnessed. and his success on fast surfaces reflect that. that same success however is not because he is some mythical all-courter who combines the hands of edberg with the force of safin. no, he is a baseliner. arguably the greatest ever in history. period.
 
The answer to the OP's question is simple. If we are using the word "domination" for what Nadal has done on clay, then it can't be used to describe Federer on hard or on grass, or any other great on any surface, tbh.

Nadal's win pct. on clay is 93%. His win pct. at the French is 99%. He has won the French 3 more times than any other player. He has won the French in 9 out of 10 years, and has a positive H2H there against the only player who beat him. His H2H against his biggest rivals is 51-8 or 86% on clay if we include the big 4 and David Ferrer. At the French, that improves to 17-0. Since 2005, he has won 19 of the 30 clay masters events, 6 of which he was the runner-up, and 2 of which he did not play. Combined with the French Open, that means that he has won 28 out of the 40 big clay tournaments from 2005-2014. Of the 38 that he actually played in, he missed the final on only 3 occasions.

Bottom line, yes, Fed dominated 2 surfaces, but Rafa "super"-dominated 1. His domination also lasted about twice as long as Fed's on either hard or grass. Nadal has also beaten Federer at the biggest stage on both hard and grass, and Federer has not been able to do it on clay.

If you can achieve the greatest domination of any surface in the history of tennis, and prove yourself on every surface by winning big titles, that's plenty in my book.
 
Last edited:
90's Clay said:
Makes it even more amazing. Nadal doesn't get 2 cracks at clay slams all year like guys like Nole and Fed get at hardcourt slams.

Imagine if two slams a year were played on clay and not hards.

Nonetheless, Nadal has PLENTY of accomplishments across all surfaces. So the point is rendered moot.
Click to expand...

Makes it even more pathetic than Nadal only has 3 HC slams.
 
mike danny said:
Because there are 2 HC slams,while there is only 1 on clay
Click to expand...

I said percentage..... that means that the number of HC slams is taken into account. So if they played the same amount of slams Rafa would need twice as many on hard as Roger does on clay. He has 3 times as much... So, higher percentage.

Nadal was won 3 of 19 slams he's played on HCs or 16%.

Fed has won 1 of 16 slams he's played on clay or 6%.
 
Last edited:
Of course he can be "GOAT". He is out of this world and far-and-away GOAT on one surface, and pretty damn great on other surfaces too (though not GOAT). His all-around greatness and absolutely legendary greatness on one surface is good enough, IMO...especially if he passes Roger's mark in slam count.

Roger may have "dominated" two surfaces, but none of his domination have been as great as Rafa's domination of one surface. So each player has their pros and cons. It's just one of those "take your pick" scenarios. Each player has a good argument.
 
Federer20042006 said:
Because he hasn't had to face someone who dominates HC the way he dominates clay. Federer had to deal with the clay GOAT.
Click to expand...

How can Federer be GOAT if he can not even dominate his own rival ?
If Borg and Sampras were his contemporaries, he probably would have crumbled the same way he did against Rafa :twisted:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tennisaddict
To be a GOAT, i think one needs 5+ majors on 2 surfaces ?
2 3
Replies
149
Views
5K
tennisaddict
tennisaddict
T
Another Federer-Nadal GOAT Thread
Replies
10
Views
5K
Nathaniel_Near
N
ps2dcgba
What would you consider for a tennis player to become GOAT?
Replies
0
Views
513
ps2dcgba
ps2dcgba
M
What Would It Say For Federer If He Loses?
2 3
Replies
136
Views
7K
Benjamin Rio
B
N
An Easier Question: GOAT by Grand Slam and by Surface
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
Cenc
C
Back
Top