In the last 8 slams ...

1477aces

Hall of Fame
Strong era nadal's main rival (djokovic) in his prime has won as many slams as weak era old man roger federer (1).
Discuss
 

jm1980

G.O.A.T.
Not only is choosing this particular range very convenient, but it's also disingenuous to ignore how far each player went:

Federer / Djokovic

2012 FO: SF vs Djokovic / F vs Nadal (Champion)
2012 W: W / SF vs Fed (Champion)
2012 USO: QF vs Berdych / F vs Murray (Champion)
2013 AO: SF vs Murray / W
2013 FO: QF vs Tsonga / SF vs Nadal (Champion)
2013 W: 2R vs Stakhovsky / F vs Murray (Champion)
2013 USO: 4R vs Robredo / F vs Nadal (Champion)
2014 AO: SF vs Nadal / QF vs Wawrinka (Champion)

In each of the last 8 slams, Djokovic either won or lost to the eventual champion. Make of that what you will.
 

FedererDropShot

Hall of Fame
Not only is choosing this particular range very convenient, but it's also disingenuous to ignore how far each player went:

Federer / Djokovic

2012 FO: SF vs Djokovic / F vs Nadal (Champion)
2012 W: W / SF vs Fed (Champion)
2012 USO: QF vs Berdych / F vs Murray (Champion)
2013 AO: SF vs Murray / W
2013 FO: QF vs Tsonga / SF vs Nadal (Champion)
2013 W: 2R vs Stakhovsky / F vs Murray (Champion)
2013 USO: 4R vs Robredo / F vs Nadal (Champion)
2014 AO: SF vs Nadal / QF vs Wawrinka (Champion)

In each of the last 8 slams, Djokovic either won or lost to the eventual champion. Make of that what you will.
But it's all about titles, no?

It's like how Federer's 11 consecutive AO semi-finals (this will be unmatched forever) or other crazy slam consistency streaks are simply ignored (especially by Fed-haters)...

No one cares about runner-ups, no?

They'd rather have 1 slam and the rest 1st round defeats than 0 slams and 50 runner-ups, no?
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Not only is choosing this particular range very convenient, but it's also disingenuous to ignore how far each player went:

Federer / Djokovic

2012 FO: SF vs Djokovic / F vs Nadal (Champion)
2012 W: W / SF vs Fed (Champion)
2012 USO: QF vs Berdych / F vs Murray (Champion)
2013 AO: SF vs Murray / W
2013 FO: QF vs Tsonga / SF vs Nadal (Champion)
2013 W: 2R vs Stakhovsky / F vs Murray (Champion)
2013 USO: 4R vs Robredo / F vs Nadal (Champion)
2014 AO: SF vs Nadal / QF vs Wawrinka (Champion)

In each of the last 8 slams, Djokovic either won or lost to the eventual champion. Make of that what you will.
All this proves is that Nadal with 3 Slams is the GOAT
 

sportsfan1

Hall of Fame
^^ If you think Nadals 3 slams in 2 years make him a goat, then what do you think Fed's 6 slams in 2 years make him - a greater goat?
 

NADALRECORD

Banned
^^^ But Nadal won 3 slams in 2010 on clay, grass, hardcourt. The most difficult calendar year feat since Laver.

And GOAT doesn't even exist, anyway.
 

Russeljones

G.O.A.T.
But it's all about titles, no?

It's like how Federer's 11 consecutive AO semi-finals (this will be unmatched forever) or other crazy slam consistency streaks are simply ignored (especially by Fed-haters)...

No one cares about runner-ups, no?

They'd rather have 1 slam and the rest 1st round defeats than 0 slams and 50 runner-ups, no?
10pwneds :)
 

Chico

Banned
But it's all about titles, no?

It's like how Federer's 11 consecutive AO semi-finals (this will be unmatched forever) or other crazy slam consistency streaks are simply ignored (especially by Fed-haters)...

No one cares about runner-ups, no?

They'd rather have 1 slam and the rest 1st round defeats than 0 slams and 50 runner-ups, no?
No. They are pros, they play for money to feed their families, not just for glory and fame. And when it comes to prize money and endorsements:
1 slam + rest 1st round <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 0 slams + 50 RUs.
 

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
^^^ But Nadal won 3 slams in 2010 on clay, grass, hardcourt. The most difficult calendar year feat since Laver.

And GOAT doesn't even exist, anyway.
Yeah, it sounds great. But Fed sort of did this 3 times. AO and USO are basically a different surface. They don't play the same.

And Fed also won WTF in this year and made all 4 finals.

So, 3x3 + (4 finals, WTF in some of those years) is more impressive to me
than 1x3 + AO quarters and no WTF.

What I find very impressive is Fed's streak after USO 11. He was back to nr.1 and won on all sorts of conditions. WTF court, fast Paris, Cincy, grass, blue clay, slow HC outdoor. And he bageled Rafa and Nole in the process.
For a guy at that age, this is very impressive to me.
 

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
OK. Yeah, Nole is praised as a tough competition for today. But besides great 2011, he wasn't so tough. Rafa/Murray/Fed all beat him.

Ironically in his best level in 2011, old Fed was giving him the most trouble.
 

NADALRECORD

Banned
OK. Yeah, Nole is praised as a tough competition for today. But besides great 2011, he wasn't so tough. Rafa/Murray/Fed all beat him.

Ironically in his best level in 2011, old Fed was giving him the most trouble.
Also, Djokovic's "2011 level" was partially dependent on others. Nadal was better in 2010, 2012 and 2013. Nadal's 2011 Roland Garros was so bad he was taken to 5 sets by Isner.
 
Top