Is Nadal greater than Laver?

Is Nadal greater than Laver?


  • Total voters
    48
  • This poll will close: .

Nole Slam

G.O.A.T.
That's what I wondered many times, but ended up having Nadal above Laver because I don't want to look like a Nadal hater.
 

skaj

Legend
Depends what your definition of greatness is.

Personally, I don't like to compare distant eras.

Both great players, I prefer Laver's playing style.
 

NADALalot

Hall of Fame
Its completely impossible to compare eras.
In fact its even impossible to say who is greater between players of the same era, as nobody knows who the best of the big3 is.
There is no established criteria for greatness, so nobody can say who the greatest is.
 
D

Deleted member 771911

Guest
It would be interesting to get the two together and have them discuss it.
 

HazBeen18

Rookie
Can't compare eras. However, I voted Rafa, based on sheer athleticism. Laver had top 3 all-time racquet skills, was an amazing competitor, with extremely high tennis IQ, but he's just not the athlete that Rafa, Roger and Novak are/were. Those three could've been successful in MANY other sports. Laver was a maximizer (maybe one of the greatest of maximizers, after Connors).
If Rafa gets in a time machine and goes back to 1969 and is told to dress in the clothes of the day and use a top-grade wood racquet with pure gut strings, I STILL think he wipes the floor with everyone, including Laver. He'd require some time to practice with this "new" equipment, but his athleticism would win out.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
...use a top-grade wood racquet with pure gut strings, I STILL think he wipes the floor with everyone, including Laver.
It’s impossible to impart excessive topspin with a wood racket and gut strings. Nadal’s entire game is based on topspin, not his athleticism. So in your scenario, he still beats everyone with little topspin and where 3/4 majors are played on grass?

No words.
 

Madinolf

Rookie
Yes, 20 Slams to 5 in the Open Era... and if you put them on a tennis court Nadal would destroy Laver. Tennis has become much more popular and evolved a lot.
 

HazBeen18

Rookie
Apologies for the linguistic stutter. I've heard a few minutes of deep breathing may allow you to type again. I believe that Rafa's heavy topspin game was created this way because it was (at the time) the best choice for a tennis player coming up in the world based on surface and equipment (i.e., Uncle Toni read his Tennis magazine each month and created a Modern Clay-Court Frankenstein). And I say this as a HARD-CORE Federer fan and someone old enough to have played with a wooden racquet with pure gut strings. Rafa doesn't beat a top-shelf Roger Federer on grass unless he has elite-level racquet skills. Add to that, elite-level speed, incredible tennis IQ, goat-level mental game, and you have someone who would fight Rod on every point and come out the victor. :)
 

skaj

Legend
Can't compare eras. However, I voted Rafa, based on sheer athleticism. Laver had top 3 all-time racquet skills, was an amazing competitor, with extremely high tennis IQ, but he's just not the athlete that Rafa, Roger and Novak are/were. Those three could've been successful in MANY other sports. Laver was a maximizer (maybe one of the greatest of maximizers, after Connors).
If Rafa gets in a time machine and goes back to 1969 and is told to dress in the clothes of the day and use a top-grade wood racquet with pure gut strings, I STILL think he wipes the floor with everyone, including Laver. He'd require some time to practice with this "new" equipment, but his athleticism would win out.
Laver was an amazing athlete, in some ways even better than those three. The same tier when it comes to athleticism.
 
According to most people it seemed Federer had surpassed Laver at 17 slams. I didn't neccessarily agree, but that is how most saw it. So based on that, yes all Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal have easily surpassed Laver at this point.
 

thrust

Hall of Fame
But 2 CYGS.
One of those was in the amateur era. IMO, amateur slams and tournaments should not count for Laver, Rosewall or Gonzalez. Therefore Pro/OE slams, Laver only has 13 slams. Rosewall has 19, Gonzalez has 14. In reality, comparing player accomplishments from vastly different eras makes no sense. Open ERA, as of now, Djolovic is #1, Federer- #2, Nadal- #3. As for the pro tour, I would rank Rosewall as #1 because he had to deal with peak: Gonzalez, Laver, Sedgman, Trabert, Segura and Hoad. Until Hoad and Rosewall came on the pro tour, Pancho's competition was primarily past peak: Riggs, Budge, much smaller Segura, and for a short period, peak Sedgman. Laver only first played past peak Gonzalez when Pancho was about 36 and peak Hoad for about one year-1963. Thirty plus year old Rosewall led peak Laver 6-4 in pro slam finals. Peak Gonzalez and Laver were a bit better than Rosewall but when it came to big matches, Ken was their equal. In the last big matches Ken and Rod played, the 71-72 WCT finals, Ken at 37 and near 38, were won by Ken.
 
If laver was on tour today, even at his age, he would take atp points, even maybe a 250
The game is so different now from when Laver was active, who knows how much he would have won. He would probably been a top player, but it is impossible to predict how well he would have done in the modern era, specially against power players and a baseline-centered type of game.
 

Slicehand

Professional
The game is so different now from when Laver was active, who knows how much he would have won. He would probably been a top player, but it is impossible to predict how well he would have done in the modern era, specially against power players and a baseline-centered type of game.
Thats true, but what im saying is that today, at his current age, he would win a 250, or at least get some points
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
No.

Is Federer greater than Laver? No

Is Djokovic greater than Laver? He was 1 match away. Close but no cigar. No.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Assuming Federer is the Greatest, yes, Nadal is greater than Laver as well.

CYGS is a highly overrated achievement.
 

Slicehand

Professional
Even today? Laver is 83, GET REAL! But then, perhaps, you are trying to be funny because you could not be that stupid.
Hes 83 but talent is talent, hed go up to the net and win matches, no doubt, you cant be that stupid thinking otherwise
 
And Djokovic was ranked 40 LOL (it might be correct back then in 2012 ;) )
That GOAT list by the Tennis Channel was a little bit premature.

Nadal was only 25 at that time and already with 10 slams and just made 4 Slam finals in a row for the first time in his career (albeit going 1-3).

Serena was 30 (with 13 Slams) and maybe looked done but also just made the final of the US Open.

Djokovic was only 24 and just won 3 straight Slams (4 of the last 5).

On a lesser scale, Sharapova was also just 24 (3 Slams) and was on a mini resurgence - she reached the Final of 2 of the last 3 slams.

They could have waited 3-4 years and see what these players do in that span, especially Nadal and Djokovic.
 
Just seeing tennis channel list. Overall it's ok list for that time 2012 I guess, although don't know how Evert with 18 Slams is behind Sampras with 14, not to mention Nadal with 10, but overall interesting list.
 

SonnyT

Hall of Fame
When Laver retired, he was seen as GOAT. When Nadal retires, Djokovic will most probably seen as GOAT.

So a definite NO!
 
Top