If Nadal wins Wimby, I'm ready to concede he's the GOAT in my book

[NatF]

Different pressure at a GS. Best of 5 sets. Lower ranked players can play out of their skin.

Players try to peak for GS - players can often be tired/carrying innury at WTF - obviously same can happen at GS but more likely at WTF as it is end of year.

There wasn't even a break between WTF and Paris last year - that's how important it is.

I was too young to be watching tennis in 70's, 80's, early 90's. I have not idea how many WTF/YEC the likes of Borg, McEnroe, etc. won. I know exactly how many GS they won.

WTF/YEC is a joke - end of discussion.

You're a joke as evidenced by this post.

There's less pressure in a best of 5 sets by the way, as you have more chance to find your game. In best of 3 if you're not on the ball straight away the match can be over. It also had a best of set 5 up till 2007.

In 2010 Federer beat Ferrer, Murray, Soderling, Djokovic and Nadal in a row. Joke draw right?

 

[Chico]

Oh c'mon! His routes to the finals of his 5 non-RG slams:

2008 SW19: Youzhny-Murray-Schuettler
2009 AO: Gonzalez-Simon-Verdasco
2010 SW19: Mathieu-Soderling-Murray
2010 USO: Lopez-Verdasco-Youzhny
2013 USO: Kohlschreiber-Robredo-Gasquet

LOL, call that not-lucky?

Indeed. It is way beyond lucky. I think it should be clear to anyone that Nadal needs to be extremely lucky and have cakewalk easy draw in order to win non clay slam.
And these days it is true for the clay slam too.

The luck has to turn at some point.

 

[Sentinel]

Slam count padded with RG's , hahaha !!

 

[Deleted member 307496]

He really showed his hand with that "only 8 " players didn't he? Lol

He showed that he undervalues the WTF because it lacks a full 128 player draw, which doesn't make any sense. Half of the time the first four rounds are a joke for top players in a major.

 

[FrontHeadlock]

You're a joke as evidenced by this post.

There's less pressure in a best of 5 sets by the way, as you have more chance to find your game. In best of 3 if you're not on the ball straight away the match can be over. It also had a best of set 5 up till 2007.

In 2010 Federer beat Ferrer, Murray, Soderling, Djokovic and Nadal in a row. Joke draw right?

Keep in mind the "top 8" thing cuts both ways. It sure LOOKS like a tougher draw only playing players in the top 8, but the top 8 guys aren't always playing the best tennis in any given draw, and particularly on any given surface. Sometimes you can get harder matches/draws in a major than at the WTF.

 

[objectivity]

Indeed. It is way beyond lucky. I think it should be clear to anyone that Nadal needs to be extremely lucky and have cakewalk easy draw in order to win non clay slam.
And these days it is true for the clay slam too.

The luck has to turn at some point.

Damn Chico, i had thought you have changed after that magnificent thread you created after Nadal's win. It appears that you are back to this anti Nadal ranting again. very sad.

 

[NatF]

Keep in mind the "top 8" thing cuts both ways. It sure LOOKS like a tougher draw only playing players in the top 8, but the top 8 guys aren't always playing the best tennis in any given draw, and particularly on any given surface. Sometimes you can get harder matches/draws in a major than at the WTF.

Yes you can end up with unknown players surprising you with their games etc...at the slams. But in general the top 8 players are going to be playing better tennis than the rest of the field.

 

[xFedal]

Indeed. It is way beyond lucky. I think it should be clear to anyone that Nadal needs to be extremely lucky and have cakewalk easy draw in order to win non clay slam.
And these days it is true for the clay slam too.

The luck has to turn at some point.

You want me to bring up Fed and Noles draws up too?

 

[xFedal]

Slam count padded with RG's , hahaha !!

Will add more Non clay slams. hahaha

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Yes you can end up with unknown players surprising you with their games etc...at the slams. But in general the top 8 players are going to be playing better tennis than the rest of the field.

And that's why they are ranked as highly as they are. They are better than the rest of the field, therefore more dangerous.

 

[objectivity]

Says who? I say WTF and YE #1 matter a lot lot more.

hey russeljones, a serious question here. suppose hypothetically, Nadal really wins the next 3 GS and hence ties Fed, and also holds all 4 GS titles simultaneously. he blows out his knees as well and promptly retires.

will you consider him greater than Fed? or at least equal?

 

[DRII]

Nadal has crashed out of Wimbledon twice the past two years. Won one USO while only playing one top ten player, and has zero world tour finals and has minimal fast hc titles (dubai, cincinnatti, paris, etc)

You were saying?

And Lmao at Fed's FH nit good on clay. You seem to forget that from 2005-2009 only rafa stood on his way on clay foe the most part.

Give me the FH that is good on fast and slow surfaces please and thanks.

please, just stop...

 

[DRII]

NADAL: Tio Toni... am I the GOAT now...?
TIO TONI: Yes, Rafa, you are. You can... you can rest now.
NADAL: *dies*
TIO TONI: RAFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

(This is fiction - Tio Toni would never admit Rafa is GOAT; instead he'd find some new record for Rafa to break)

uhm, kind of horrible much?

and sadly, the morbid thinking is, representative of multiple Nadal haters on this forum...

 

[tennisaddict]

These threads are way too premature.

Nadal needs 18 majors to be considered GOAT, that is 4 majors more , that is the career of Hewitt and Murray put together. Such is the gap at this time.

If Nadal gets there, well good for him. Then he will be the 'Greatest Record Holder of all time' , not the greatest tennis player still.

 

[monfed]

Niktroll made a thread of rooting for Ralph so I can't take him seriously.

Meanwhile 9/14 on clay.:lol: Sorry no GOAT.

As far as the battle of FHs go - Fed on HC,grass,indoors. Ralph's moonball on clay.

Nadal is the luckiest tennis player of all time and it's not even close.

 

[beast of mallorca]

Not too long ago, I confessed that if Nadal crosses Sampras' GS figure, I'd have to start considering him as serious GOAT contender even if he is behind a couple of slams from Federer.

Today, I think I'm ready to say that even as I think Roger is the best player I've seen (subjective), Nadal will be the GOAT if he wins no.15 at Wimby 2014.

Why this condition when some already consider him the best ever?
1. First of all, if he hadn't at least equaled Sampras' record, Nadal's only claim would be a self-referential personal record over Federer. (Nadal is greatest because he beat the greatest). With 14 under his belt and within spitting distance of Roger's record, the H2H is definitely now a decider.

2. If he wins Wimbledon again, not only does Nadal cross Sampras but he does a 3 peat of FO-Wimby back to back. No matter your fidelity, that is an impressive achievement and I daresay better than YE masters trophies . Surely Federer will do his best to stop him and if that doesn't work, then one can't reasonably say Federer is better when he couldn't defend his most cherished surface. Prime or not, whether he agrees or not, this is what Roger is playing for....to try and put some more distance between himself and Nadal.

3. Back when there was a comfortable 6-7 slam difference between the two, it was disrespectful to Roger's achievements and illogical to simply use the H2H as a way to say Nadal is a better player. But even if both guys retired with 15 and 17 respectively, can anyone argue H2H doesn't make a dent in their comparison. And not only that but Olympic gold, Davis cup, winning record against peers and finally sheer respect from the whole tennis community including from Roger?.... it'd be hard to argue against it at that point IMO.


Now what happens if Nadal doesn't win Wimbledon this year? Well, then I'd have to delay this discussion some more. Perhaps he'll cross it at the USO or AO and then we'd be back to the same point. But what if never wins another slam again for some reason? Then it'd be hard to argue he's greatest when Sampras has at least equal claim.

What happens with Fed wins at Wimby and gets to no. 18? Well, again, we'd have to kick the can down the road. At that point, it'd be wiser to wait until both are retired to see where they end up.


One thing is certain though... anyone denying at this point that Nadal is even in contention for the GOAT discussion is a partisan dreamer. The guy is in the Top 5 best players to ever play the game, that's for sure.

You are gonna be grilled by the Federinas of this forum:twisted:

 

[xFedal]

Niktroll made a thread of rooting for Ralph so I can't take him seriously.

Meanwhile 9/14 on clay.:lol: Sorry no GOAT.

As far as the battle of FHs go - Fed on HC,grass,indoors. Ralph's moonball on clay.

Nadal is the luckiest tennis player of all time and it's not even close.

No Feds FH is better on Clay as well.

 

[Flint]

It is a tough decision, and again I am coming at this from a completely neutral standpoint.

Well I think we are all agreed that Nadal is the clay goat.

That is one of the 4 slams, and I think we all agree Federer is better than Nadal at the other 75% of the slams.

Federer has a unbroken run of 5 Wimbledons and 5 US Opens.
Nadal does not have a run of more than 1 outside of the French. That is fairly damming at this moment in time (but so is the H2H)

What is also extremely impressive is that Federer has an unbroken run of 11 at least semi finals (with 4 wins) at the AO. Again Nadals record at the Australin Open pales into insignificance against Federers.

Federer has also spent about triple the time of Nadal as world number 1.

So at this moment I would put Federer ahead of Nadal even with the H2H.

If Nadal can add a couple more of the other 3 slams before retirement though I would put him ahead. So for its wait and see....

 

[beast of mallorca]

Indeed. It is way beyond lucky. I think it should be clear to anyone that Nadal needs to be extremely lucky and have cakewalk easy draw in order to win non clay slam.
And these days it is true for the clay slam too.

The luck has to turn at some point.

Damn Chico, i had thought you have changed after that magnificent thread you created after Nadal's win. It appears that you are back to this anti Nadal ranting again. very sad.

Snakes shed their skin but they will always be snakes ssssssssssss:twisted:

 

[tacou]

OP I agree with most of your points, but if Rafa finishes with 15 and Fed stays at 17, at best you could call them equals. I personally DO believe the h2h is relevant now that they are so close, but a gap of 2 majors would be significant.

However, if he wins Wimby, he will go into USO with supreme confidence AND he's at least got one more FO in him. So, if he wins W he will at least get to 16 majors.

 

[cc0509]

I doubt Nadal is reaching 17 slams. There is some thread about stats and the most they see him winning are 16 majors. Im not even sure about 16. Looks tough. Maybe 15 tops.

Stop making your stupid predictions. You are always wrong.

It is very possible that Nadal will at least equal Federer's slam count, be prepared. That is obviously his target now no matter what he says. It has to be.

 

[cc0509]

but olympic gold matters, and Davis cup? LoL

Yes. I think the Olympics are taken more seriously by the players than the YEC. It did not used to be like that but it has changed.

 

[beast of mallorca]

More outstanding than winning 3 Slams more than any other male tennis player in the Open Era? That 14th must have been very intoxicating for some fans.

And got even more Fed fans depress and angry, like you obviously..........:twisted:

 

[cc0509]

The WTF or YEC has been an important tournament for 40 years, it's the 5th biggest tournament in tennis. Only certain Nadal fans thinking beating at least 4 top 10 players in a single tournament is meaningless. Federer has 5 times beaten 5 top 10 players in a row to win the YEC. That's pretty special.

I think it would be great if Nadal could win one YEC but the truth is, it is not necessary. What is more important is for Nadal to try and win a couple more slams off clay imo.

 

[TMF]

If he wins Wimbledon, that's still 2 shy of Federer 17.

That's like saying Federer at 12 slams is a GOAT or ahead of Sampras.

Please respect great players who are ahead of Nadal.

 

[cc0509]

The problem for him is grass is his worst surface now. He's been losing to journeymen there for 2 years in a row. Can't see him winning Wimbledon again TBH. At the USO, no male player won multiple titles there after turning 27 since the modern era of tennis began in the mid 1980s, post wooden racquet. Lendl couldn't. Sampras couldn't. Agassi couldn't. Federer couldn't. Nobody won more than one USO after turning 27 since 1985. Nadal is not doing it either.

RG and AO are the only chances he has.

No it isn't. Stop talking nonsense.

 

[cc0509]

Says who? I say WTF and YE #1 matter a lot lot more.

You would be wrong about that.

 

[Cup8489]

Djokovic has a thing about dumping serve after being up 30-love...
http://youtu.be/Iiu4WNXgZ-8?t=17m12s

 

[FrontHeadlock]

I think it would be great if Nadal could win one YEC but the truth is, it is not necessary. What is more important is for Nadal to try and win a couple more slams off clay imo.

I think this is right. If you are going to take the position that he HAS to win a WTF, then you're essentially lifting it to major status. It should probably be lumped in with the Masters 1000 tournaments, or should maybe count as 1.5 of a Masters 1000.

I do think Nadal would do well in the discussion with 1 more W and AO. That would give him 16 with 3 channel slams and 2x career GS. That's a darn good resume notwithstanding Fed's accomplishments.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

I'm not sure if Nadal is GOAT - I don't think so.

Then again in my eyes niether is FED due to 23-10 - I can't say a guy is GOAT if he has being whipped so many times by another player. If it was close I could look past it but tis such a bad H2H.

I don't think you can say either is GOAT really as can point out negatives with both.

 

[Mike Sams]

Nadal is a candidate for top 10 best ever. But I consider him the greatest clay court player in history. His results on clay compared to other surfaces at the Slams is a bit too lopsided.
I unfortunately cannot consider him the GOAT except on clay. But still a fabulous career.

 

[ultradr]

Nadal is the greatest player in last decade or so.

At the end of his career, he will probably be well inside top 5 in all time list.

Nadal's status and record on clay will be immortal.

 

[BrooklynNY]

Nadal went from having not enough slams to have a discussion, to having too many slams of one type.

What does this evolve into next?

 

[gambitt]

h2h could be 28-10 before Fed retires. Are we seriously still counting the wins of a guy at his peak beating up an old man?

 

[Bender]

I think the significance of surface homogenization is completely missed by this one.

If homogenisation is such a big thing, why is it that Nadal must win three slams off clay to be the GOAT?

 

[The Green Mile]

h2h could be 28-10 before Fed retires. Are we seriously still counting the wins of a guy at his peak beating up an old man?

Nadal is WAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY.... past his prime. And yeah why not count them, it wouldn't of mattered any way, as Fed always got creamed by him. The HTH could be 38-10 and I'd still laugh.

 

[mike danny]

Nadal is WAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY.... past his prime. And yeah why not count them, it wouldn't of mattered any way, as Fed always got creamed by him. The HTH could be 38-10 and I'd still laugh.

Actually you are wrong.

Only after 2010 Fed got creamed by Rafa.

Before then they were equal

 

[aldeayeah]

Actually you are wrong.

Only after 2010 Fed got creamed by Rafa.

Before then they were equal

A weird sort of equality in which Nadal won most often, actually.

But yes, it was a good contest until 2010.

2004: Nadal 1-0 Federer (1-0 hard)
2005: Nadal 1-1 Federer (1-0 clay, 0-1 hard)
2006: Nadal 4-2 Federer (3-0 clay, 1-1 hard, 0-1 grass)
2007: Nadal 2-3 Federer (2-1 clay, 0-1 hard, 0-1 grass)
2008: Nadal 4-0 Federer (3-0 clay, 1-0 grass)
2009: Nadal 1-1 Federer (0-1 clay, 1-0 hard)

Pre-2010: Nadal 13-7 Federer (9-2 clay, 3-3 hard, 1-2 grass)

2010: Nadal 1-1 Federer (1-0 clay, 0-1 hard)
2011: Nadal 3-1 Federer (2-0 clay, 1-1 hard)
2012: Nadal 1-1 Federer (1-1 hard)
2013: Nadal 4-0 Federer (1-0 clay, 3-0 hard)
2014: Nadal 1-0 Federer (1-0 hard)

Post-2010: Nadal 10-3 Federer (4-0 clay, 6-3 hard)

Considering all things, Federer did not do that bad after that either!

The clay train was lost in 2010, but it's not until 2013 that Nadal starts consistently owning Fed on hard courts (and even so, 2013 Cincy was a good contest).

 

[Russeljones]

If homogenisation is such a big thing, why is it that Nadal must win three slams off clay to be the GOAT?

Said who? He has to win 4 total, regardless of where.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

h2h could be 28-10 before Fed retires. Are we seriously still counting the wins of a guy at his peak beating up an old man?

A funny one - should we not count the wins Fed had at the start of Rafa's career (Rafa was young,inexperienced,etc).

I would be agreeing with you though - the wins now are bit a unfair at Fed's age(for lack of a better phrase). Fed is simply AWESOME for just competing at this age never mind still being a top player.

 

[gambitt]

A funny one - should we not count the wins Fed had at the start of Rafa's career (Rafa was young,inexperienced,etc).

Rafa was beating Fed already at that age. 19 year old Nadal obviously better than 33,34,35 year old Fed.

It's a bit like the Davydenko stat. It was 6-4 when they played in their respective primes. Davydenko is done as a tennis player but he managed to draw Rafa once more so now it's 6-5. I'm sure Nadal fans are desperate for a couple of Davy-Nadal matches so the h2h can finish 7-6 even though it would be a meaningless stat.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

Rafa was beating Fed already at that age. 19 year old Nadal obviously better than 33,34,35 year old Fed.

It's a bit like the Davydenko stat. It was 6-4 when they played in their respective primes. Davydenko is done as a tennis player but he managed to draw Rafa once more so now it's 6-5. I'm sure Nadal fans are desperate for a couple of Davy-Nadal matches so the h2h can finish 7-6 even though it would be a meaningless stat.

I know that but Fed certainly had an edge in terms of experience,etc.

In the same way you could argue recent wins are because Fed is too old I think you could argue Nadal was young,only on the scene so to speak.

Personally I'd be leaning towards Fed is too old in recent times and the 23-10 is a little unfair - it looks as thought one is far superiro to the other and the is not the case.

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

Rafa was beating Fed already at that age. 19 year old Nadal obviously better than 33,34,35 year old Fed.

It's a bit like the Davydenko stat. It was 6-4 when they played in their respective primes. Davydenko is done as a tennis player but he managed to draw Rafa once more so now it's 6-5. I'm sure Nadal fans are desperate for a couple of Davy-Nadal matches so the h2h can finish 7-6 even though it would be a meaningless stat.

I'd say most couldn't care less to be honest

 

[gambitt]

Why did you reply twice to the same post? :-?

 

[irishnadalfan1983]

Why did you reply twice to the same post? :-?

I missed the second bit and I'm at work so rushing thru these things - can't have the boss see me wasting time here

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Nadal is WAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY.... past his prime. And yeah why not count them, it wouldn't of mattered any way, as Fed always got creamed by him. The HTH could be 38-10 and I'd still laugh.

If way past his prime started this year you would be right. Nadal started declining on clay (physically) last year however.

 

[smalahove]

This debacle reminds me of the ongoing and neverending Pele vs Maradona GOAT discussion. We all have different criteria for crowning the GOAT, so there's no reason to bash your opinions on others.

And each slam requires hard work, and none is to be taken for granted. Just ask the GOAT elect of golf, Tiger Woods ;-)

 

[aldeayeah]

Nadal's movement on clay started declining after 2008. Although "decline" is probably not the right word. "Became slightly less awesome" may be a better way to put it.

 

[Russeljones]

This debacle reminds me of the ongoing and neverending Pele vs Maradona GOAT discussion. We all have different criteria for crowning the GOAT, so there's no reason to bash your opinions on others.

And each slam requires hard work, and none is to be taken for granted. Just ask the GOAT elect of golf, Tiger Woods ;-)

I agree. It's equally stupid to claim Maradona is GOAT.

 

[Bobby Jr]

...And not only that but Olympic gold, Davis cup, ...

....But what if never wins another slam again for some reason? Then it'd be hard to argue he's greatest when Sampras has at least equal claim.

How can you argue first that the Olympic gold and Davis cup are extra nods in Nadal's favour over Federer but then a paragraph later claim that if Nadal only matches Sampras in slam numbers that Sampras could possibly still have equal claim....?

What is good for the goose is good for the gander...