If Fed had not won the French Open....

[Ledigs]

It is a good thing for Federer that he won the French Open, because if Nadal won the US Open and a few more GS's Federer would not be GOAT.

As of now, Nadal needs to win at least 5 more slams to be in contention. and at least 2 should be Wimbledon and 1 should be HC.

 

[Ultra2HolyGrail]

Yup, Nadal needs 16 GS to even begin to compare to federer.. Forget the 14-7 H2H, the massacres at the french, the beat down in australia, wimbledon win and the very likely beatdowns if they played last wimbledon or this years u.s open... Federer=16 Nadal-9... Fed is better :roll:

 

[Tennis_Monk]

Federer is very lucky he won the French Open, as if Nadal won the US Open and a few more GS's Federer would not be GOAT.

As of now, Nadal needs to win at least 5 more slams to be in contention. and at least 2 should be Wimbledon and 1 should be HC.

every champion needs a bit of luck to become one but at the sametime it isnt entirely luck that got Federer his French open.

No one would win 16 slams by sheer luck.

However your point is valid in that by winning French open, Federer moved into a different league (no comparisons with Sampras anymore) and by getting more titles he firmly established as GOAT.

Rafa is on track to become a GOAT. he isnt a GOAT yet. If he can get a few more slams (doesnt have to be 14) , Rafa will move beyond sampras (due to his career slam and gold medal) and right behind the heels of federer.

 

[Tsonga#1fan]

I don't think Nadal need 16 slams to be mentioned in the same sentence with Federer. The quality of his wins, over Federer in finals of slams and Federer's "meaningless" French dictate that. Unless something drastic happens, Nadal has the best shot I can remember anybody having of winning a calander slam next year and Nadal is most surely on pace to at least get close to 16 slams, while Federer has maybe a couple left in him and that is a stretch.

 

[Tennis_Monk]

I don't think Nadal need 16 slams to be mentioned in the same sentence with Federer. The quality of his wins, over Federer in finals of slams and Federer's "meaningless" French dictate that. Unless something drastic happens, Nadal has the best shot I can remember anybody having of winning a calander slam next year and Nadal is most surely on pace to at least get close to 16 slams, while Federer has maybe a couple left in him and that is a stretch.

So how many does Nadal need?

 

[decades]

if nadal can win 2 of "each" he will get many GOAT votes. fed didn't do this.

 

[T1000]

Federer is very lucky he won the French Open, as if Nadal won the US Open and a few more GS's Federer would not be GOAT.

As of now, Nadal needs to win at least 5 more slams to be in contention. and at least 2 should be Wimbledon and 1 should be HC.

Nadal is very lucky Del Potro didn't play

 

[Hood_Man]

Federer's been really lucky, in fact one of the luckiest tennis players in history. I mean, being born with all that talent...

Federer's French Open was not lucky. He reached 4 consecutive finals, that's a record he shares with Nadal and Borg, the two greatest clay court players in the open era. Not bad for his "worst" surface...

I guarantee that if Nadal equals Federer's Majors he'll face the same criticism's that Federer faces, the same constantly changing criteria, the same guys downplaying his success, the same claims that it was a weak era...

 

[Ledigs]

I didn't mean lucky as in he didn't work hard for it, I mean lucky as in, it's essential that he did win it.

 

[Tsonga#1fan]

So how many does Nadal need?

How many do I think he needs? For what, to be mentioned favorably in comparison to Federer? I personally think only three or four more. Roger's inability to win a French when it counted (Those finals against Nadal) and Nadal's multiple slam victory's on hardcourt, grass and the French are worth more. I think Nadal will tally up more than three or four more though and even if he were to win the calander slam next year, retire......he'd go down in my book, hands down better than Federer. So, everybody is going to have an opinion of what means more.

 

[Tsonga#1fan]

Nadal is very lucky Del Potro didn't play

I think del Potro is lucky a less than 100% Nadal was at the U S Open last year. Talk about a one slam wonder!

 

[drakulie]

Federer is very lucky he won the French Open, .

I agree, the same way Nadal was *LUCKY* to win the French, Wimbledon, and USO this year. :roll:

Like I said earlier today,,,,,,, "I see the monkeys are loose from the Zoo today".

 

[Ledigs]

Fed has won 1 on clay, 6 on grass and 9 on hard court

Nadal has won 5 on clay, 2 on grass and 2 on hard court. 3-4 more should do it especially if they are on hard and grass (and can't see him not winning at least one more French)

 

[Ledigs]

I agree, the same way Nadal was *LUCKY* to win the French, Wimbledon, and USO this year. :roll:

Like I said earlier today,,,,,,, "I see the monkeys are loose from the Zoo today".

I meant that it is essential that he won that to be in talks for GOAT. Now, at the TIME he won it, he didn't need it. The French open victory just helped him along. Now that Nadal has won a career slam and with his H2H and slam pace, well that's why now he NEEDS that French. Before he did not. The game has changed.

 

[T1000]

I think del Potro is lucky a less than 100% Nadal was at the U S Open last year. Talk about a one slam wonder!

Del Potro > Nadal on hard, especially fast courts at the USO.

 

[autumn_leaf]

why do people think that it's luck that federer was able to manage his schedule better, plays a style that's not brutal on the body, takes measures to prevent injury that nadal was injured??? i hope that federer will be like connors and play till he's about 40. he might not though since i don't think he can take being out of the top ten, but in my mind, barring injury, he'll be in contention for a GS for many years to come.

 

[Berdasco]

I think everyone is forgetting, Nadal WAS in the draw for FO09, he was beaten. Fed's FO is by no means lucky. Some might say W09 was since Rafa was not there to defend, hell Fed even mentioned it in his speech after he won W09. But by the same token then Delpo was not there to defend USO10, a year after he obliterated Nadal in the semis.

 

[Ledigs]

Alright people. English is my first language and sometimes we say lucky when we mean, "good thing he won it". I don't mean it was luck that caused him to win it. I mean that it's a good thing he won it cause now he NEEDS it. I've adjusted the top post to reflect what I MEANT.

 

[redpurusha]

What is a GOAT? Oh.. Greatest of ALL TIME? I needed to pose the question to figure it out lol

I didnt' think Rafa would be able to step up his game and win the US at the hard courts but he proved all doubters wrong by even changing his grip to improve his game.

Djokovic's two 6-4 set loses were tight with many break points and duece after duece so it wasn't like he got destroyed by Nadal, even now he has a much better head2head record against him, though the tide has swung towards Nadal. I don't think Djokovic could have played better, the only player to get a set on Nadal the entire tournament, definitely gonna get a lot more respect now after this from everyone all around.

 

[Legend of Borg]

I think del Potro is lucky a less than 100% Nadal was at the U S Open last year. Talk about a one slam wonder!

I don't think anyone could have stopped Juan Martin in that US Open. He was just zoning out. I'm looking forward to his return later this year at the Paris Masters (?).